. 

on 


STP 

** 


PRELIMINARY  REPORT 

TO  THE 

MAYOR  and  ALDERMEN 

OF  THE 

CITY  OF  CHICAGO. 

BY  THE 

Chicago  Commission  on  the 
Liquor  Problem 


[Ml! 


<  P 


C.  PUBS.) 


CHICAGO 
DECEMBER,    1916 


PRELIMINARY  REPORT 

TO  THE 

MAYOR  and  ALDERMEN 

OF  THE 

CITY  OF  CHICAGO 

BY  THE 

Chicago  Commission  on  the 
Liquor  Problem 


CHICAGO 
DECEMBER,    1916 


\ 


CHICAGO  COMMISSION 

ON  THE 

LIQUOR  PROBLEM 

Appointed  by  Mayor  Thompson  upon  Order  of  the  City 

Council  to  Make  a  Comprehensive  Study  and  Report  on 

the  Medical,  Moral,  Political,  Social,  Financial, 

Economic  and  Other  Aspects  of  the  Use  of 

Intoxicating  Liquors  in  Chicago. 


MEMBERS  OF  COMMISSION 

Chairman.  ALDERMAN  JOHN  TOMAN 

Alderman  HUGH  NORRIS  Alderman  CONRAD  H.  JANKE 

Alderman  JOSEPH  HIGGINS  SMITH         Mr.  HENRY  BARRETT  CHAMBERLIN 
Alderman  WILLIAM  R.  OTOOLE  Prof.  ROBERT  WAHL 

Alderman  WILLIAM  E.  RODRIGUEZ         Mr.  A.  D.  WEINER 

Secretary,  FREDERICK  REX.  Municipal  Reference  Librarian 
1005    City   Hall.   Chicago 


CONTENTS. 

Page 

Report  of  Commission 1-5 

Order  Creating  the  Commission 1 

Number  of  Meetings  Held 1 

Conclusions    . 1-3 

Recommendations   3-5 

APPENDICES. 

Appendix  A.    Distribution,  Ownership,  Physical  Characteristics  and  Opera- 
tion of  Licensed  Saloons  in  the  City  of  Chicago 7-44 

Letter  of  Transmittal 9 

Introduction    10 

1.  Investigation  and  Reports  by  License  Officers 10 

2.  Analysis  and  Detailed  Tabulation  of  Data 10-11 

3.  Scope  of  Statistical  Analysis 11-12 

4.  Summary  Tables  and  Exhibits 12 

Part  1.     Distribution  of  Saloon  Licenses  and  Saloons 12-14 

Part  2.     Ownership  and  Control  of  Saloon  Licenses,  Saloon  Fixtures,  and 

Leases  to  Saloon  Premises 14-15 

Part  3.     Physical  Characteristics  of  Saloons 15 

Part  4.     Operation  of  Saloons 16 

Description  of  General  Tables: 

Table  I.  Statistics  of  Number  of  Licensed  Saloons,  License  Fees,  Total 
Population  of  Chicago  and  Ratios  of  Population  to  Each  Saloon 
for  Each  of  the  Years  Immediately  Prior  to  and  Since  the  Passage 
of  the  Harkin  Ordinance 17 

Table  II.    Number  of  Semi-Annual  and  Annual  Saloon  Licenses  Issued 

by  Months  and  Years,  1910-1916 18 

Table  III.    Receipts  for  Saloon  Licenses  by  Months  and  Years,  1906-1916      18 

Table  IV.  Summary  of  Distribution  of  Licensed  Saloons  by  Police 
Precincts.  Statistics  of  Prohibition,  Local  Option,  and  Open  Terri- 
tory Areas,  Estimated  Population  and  Ratios  of  Population  and 
Areas  to  Saloons 19 

Table  V.  Summary  of  Distribution  of  Licensed  Saloons  by  Wards. 
Statistics  on  Areas,  Estimated  Population  and  Distribution  of 
Population  According  to  Nativity,  Number  of  Saloons  and  Ratio  of 
Population  to  Each  Saloon  Within  Wards 20 

Table  VI.    Control  and  Ownership  of  City  Saloon  Licenses 21 

Table  VII.     Ownership  of  Saloon  Leases 22 

Table  VIII.    Ownership  of  Saloon  Fixtures 23 

Table  IX.     Control   and   Ownership   of  Saloon   Licenses,   Leases   and 

Fixtures  by  Breweries 24 

Table  X.    Ownership  of  Government  Liquor  Licenses 25 

Table   XI.     Number   of    Saloons    Nearer    than    250    Feet    to    Schools, 

Churches  or  Other  Public  Buildings 26 

Table  XII.  Number  of  Saloons  Having  Direct  Entrances  and  Exits  to 
Alleys,  Yards  or  Open  Grounds,  in  Addition  to  Street  Entrances 
and  Exits  27 

Table  XIII.     Number  of  Saloons  Having  Direct  Connections  to  Hotels 

and  Rooms 28 


11 

Page 

Table  XIV.    Number  of  Saloons  Having  Partitions,  Stalls,  Wine  Rooms, 

Restaurants,  Cafes  or  Picnic  or  Palm  Gardens  in  Connection 29 

Table  XV.     Operation  of  Saloons 30 

Table  XVI.     Number  of  Individual   Owners,   Partnerships,   Operators 

and  Employes  Engaged  in  Saloon  Business 31 

Table  XVII.    Number  of  Saloons  Having  Amusements,  Entertainments 

or  Other  Businesses  in  Connection  with  Saloon 32 

Table  XVIII.  Summary  Distribution  of  Revocations  of  Saloon  Licenses 
During  the  Period  Beginning  Immediately  Preceding  the  Passage 
of  the  Harkin  Ordinance;  (June,  1906)  and  Up  to  June,  1916 ?.?, 

EXHIBITS. 

A.  Questionnaire  Relating  to  the  Distribution,  Ownership,  Operation  and 
Physical  Characteristics  of  Saloons 34 

B.  List  of  Names  of  Saloonkeepers,  Locations  and  Dates  of  Revocations 
and  Restorations  of  Saloon  Licenses  During  Period  Beginning  Immedi- 
ately Preceding  the  Passage  of  the  Harkin  Ordinance 35-44 

C.  Police  Precinct  and  Ward  Map  of  the  City  of  Chicago 45 

Appendix  B.  Reply  of  the  Chicago  Brewers'  Protective  Association  to  the 
Questionnaires  on  the  Financial  and  Economic  Aspects  of  the  Use  of 
Intoxicating  Liquors  in  Chicago 47 

Appendix  C.     Digest  of  the  Hearings  Before  the  Chicago  Commission  on 

the  Liquor  Problem 48-65 

Mr.  E.  J.  Davis 49-50 

Mr.  Philip  Freiler 50-53 

Mr.  Thomas  Greif 53-54 

Mr.  'R.  L.  Hill 54-55 

Mr.  George  F.  Lohman 55 

Mr.  Martin  McGraw 55-56 

Mr.  John  W.  Maskell 56-57 

Mr.  Theodore  Oehne 57.61 

Mr.  Horace  Secrist 61 

Mr.  John  A.  Shields 61-64 

Mr.  George  H.  Wischman .  .64-65 


To  His  Honor  the  Mayor  and 

The  Honorable  the  City  Council  of  the  City  of  Chicago: 

Your  Commission,  officially  known  as  the  Chicago  Commission  on  the 
Liquor  Problem,  appointed  by  his  Honor  the  Mayor  in  conformity  with  an 
order  passed  by  the  City  Council  at  its  regular  session,  July  12,  1915,  as  fol- 
lows: 

"Ordered,  That  the  Mayor  be  and  is  hereby  authorized  and  directed 
to  appoint  a  committe  of  six  aldermen  and  three  citizens,  to  consider  in 
a  comprehensive  way  the  medical,  moral,  political,  financial,  social  and 
economic  aspects  of  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  in  Chicago;  to  consider 
the  chief  methods  of  licensing,  regulating  and  prohibiting  the  sale  of 
intoxicating  liquors;  and  to  recommend  to  this  Council  the  best  prac- 
tical policy  for  this  municipality  to  pursue," 

begs  leave  to  submit  for  your  consideration  a  preliminary  report  together 
with  such  recommendations  as  an  incomplete  study  of  the  problem  at  this 
time  appears  to  warrant. 

The  liquor  problem  has  many  ramifications  affecting  the  political,  social 
and  economic  interest  of  the  city  and  your  Commission  is  not  yet  prepared 
to  make  final  suggestions.  Further  reports  will  be  made  from  time  to  time  as 
the  inquiry  proceeds.  With  this  report  are  submitted  three  enclosures: 

Appendix  A:  Statistical  Analysis  as  to  the  Distribution,  Ownership,  Physical 
Characteristics  and  Operation  of  the  Licensed  Saloons  in  the 
City  of  Chicago;  Information  collected  by  the  License  Officers 
of  the  Department  of  Police. 

Appendix  B:  Reply  of  the  Chicago  Brewers'  Protective  Association  to  the 
Questionnaire  issued  by  your  Commission. 

Appendix  C:     Digest  of  hearings  before  the  Commission. 

Enclosure  "A"  constitutes  the  first  set  of  official  figures  procured  in  Chi- 
cago or,  in  so  far  as  we  can  ascertain,  in  any  American  city,  on  the  four  import- 
ant aspects  of  the  saloon  business  mentioned.  The  investigation,  which  was 
made  through  the  license  officers  of  the  Department  of  Police,  will  be  found 
to  cover  all  important  features  under  these  heads. 

Aside  from  such  uses  the  Commission  would  make  of  this  information  the 
compilation  was  deemed  to  be  of  value  for  police  administrative  purposes,  for 
use  of  public  and  civic  organizations  and  for  the  general  education  of  the 
large  number  of  persons  who  must  be  directly  or  indirectly  interested  and  con- 
cerned in  these  questions. 

It  is  our  belief  that  for  the  purposes  of  police  administration  and  for  the 
general  information  of  the  public  such  reports  should  be  made  regularly  by 
the  license  officers  and  made  a  part  of  the  annual  report  of  the  police  depart- 
ment. 

Twenty-one  meetings  have  been  held  by  the  Commission  and  twenty-four 
witnesses  have  testified.  The  witnesses  heard  may  be  classified  as  follows: 

City  officials ..3        Anti-saloon   3       Real  estate 1 

Brewers    3         Prohibitionists 2        Insurance    1 

Saloonkeepers    3        Liquor  dealers 1        Publicists    1 

Labor  unionists 3        Business    1        Dance  hall  owners ....  1 

Economists  1 

Throughout  the  hearings  the  fact  which  has  most  firmly  impressed  itself 
on  the  members  of  the  Commission  is  that  what  Chicago  needs  in  the  way 
of  better  regulation  of  the  sale  of  alcoholic  beverages,  is  a  strict  enforcement 
of  existing  laws  and  ordinances.  In  some  respects  existing  laws  may  be  inade- 
quate to  meet  the  situation  and  certain  amendments  may  be  necessary,  but  it 
would  be  futile  to  recommend  the  enactment  of  new  legislation,  while  the 
present  laws  are  not  enforced. 

The  Commission  has  found  a  woeful  lack  of  law  enforcement  in  connection 


with  the  regulation  of  the  sale  of  alcoholic  beverages.  This  lack  of  law 
enforcement  does  not  apply  particularly  to  the  present  administration  and  no 
such  criticism  is  intended  in  this  report.  Under  no  administration,  so  far  as 
the  Commission  can  judge  from  the  evidence  disclosed,  has  there  even  been  a 
real  effort  to  compel  the  dealers  in  spirituous,  vinous,  malt  and  brewed  liquors 
to  comply  strictly  with  the  state  laws  and  city  ordinances  regulating  the  sale 
of  alcoholic  beverages. 

This  lack  of  law  enforcement  is  so  notorious  that  the  public  has  grown 
callous  and  no  longer  accepts  in  good  faith  any  order  issued  which  has  to  do 
with  the  regulation  of  saloons  and  places  where  alcoholic  beverages  are  sold. 
This  disrespect  for  the  law  has  a  most  dangerous  tendency  in  a  democracy.  If 
the  laws  are  violated  in  one  direction  and  the  violators  are  allowed  to  escape 
punishment,  it  has  a  tendency  to  break  down  our  entire  system  of  government. 
Lawlessness  in  any  one  particular  direction  breeds  lawlessness  in  other  direc- 
tions and  the  effect  is  utterly  demoralizing  to  the  community. 

Not  only  does  our  easy  tolerance  of  violations  of  the  liquor  laws  have  a 
demoralizing  effect  on  the  community,  but  it  works  a  great  injustice  to  the  law- 
abiding  citizens  who  are  engaged  in  the  sale  of  alcoholic  beverages.  From  its 
investigations  the  Commission  believes  that  a  great  majority  of  those  engaged 
in  the  liquor  business  desire  to  conduct  their  establishments  in  accordance 
with  the  law.  Such  citizens  are  compelled  to  bear  the  odium  heaped  upon  all 
engaged  in  the  sale  of  alcoholic  beverages,  because  of  the  misdeeds  of  those 
who  should  not  be  permitted  to  engage  in  the  business  at  all. 

Why  are  the  laws  regulating  the  sale  of  liquors  not  enforced?  To  say 
that  they  cannot  be  enforced  is  an  insult  to  our  law-making  bodies  as  well  as 
to  those  entrusted  with  the  administration  of  government  and  the  enforce- 
ment of  law.  Because  they  never  have  been  enforced  in  the  past,  is  far  from 
an  admission  that  they  are  unenforcible.  The  fault  lies  not  alone  with  the 
laws,  but  with  our  whole  system  of  law  enforcement. 

Regulation  of  the  liquor  traffic  is  a  principle  so  well  established  and  so 
generally  recognized  that  no  argument  in  defense  of  it  is  necessary.  Why, 
therefore,  should  the  laws  that  regulate  the  conduct  of  a  saloon  not  be  enforced 
as  equally  and  as  fully  as  the  laws  regulating  a  grocery  store  or  any  other 
legitimate  line  of  business?  Why  should  some  enjoy  special  privileges  to  the 
business  disadvantage  of  their  law-abiding  competitors?  Why  should  law- 
abiding  saloonkeepers  be  penalized  for  observing  the  law?  Yet  that  is  what 
is  happening  every  day  in  Chicago. 

Because  of  a  sinister  political  influence  law  enforcement,  as  it  applies  to 
the  liquor  business,  has  become  a  joke  and  a  by  word.  As  soon  as  a  police 
order  is  issued  to  "clean  up"  places  of  questionable  character,  this  influence 
makes  itself  felt.  The  police  are  afraid  to  do  their  duty,  because  if  they  offend 
some  one  who  is  a  political  power  in  his  ward,  they  find  themselves  transferred 
— "sent  to  the  woods" — for  the  "good  of  the  .service."  The  police  are  not  to 
blame  under  such  circumstances.  The  responsibility  rests  higher  up.  The 
whole  system  is  vicious  and  calls  for  immediate  remedy. 

This  pernicious  system  of  political  "pull"  works  an  injury  to  the  decent, 
law-abiding  citizen  engaged  in  the  sale  of  alcoholic  beverages,  who  desires  to 
comply  with  the  law.  Suppose  that  it  is  the  1  o'clock  ordinance  or  the  Sunday 
closing  law  that  is  under  consideration.  The  law-abiding  saloonkeeper  closes 
his  place  promptly  at  the  hour  designated  by  the  law.  His  competitor  across 
the  street  is  allowed  to  keep  his  place  open.  The  policeman  on  the  beat  knows 
the  law  is  being  violated  and  so  reports  to  his  superior  officer.  The  violation 
continues  and  the  policeman  learns  in  some  indirect  way  that  "things  have 
been  fixed."  He  does  not  want  to  be  transferred  to  a  beat  out  in  Hegewisch, 
so  he  maintains  a  discreet  silence.  Thus  is  contempt  for  law  bred  in  the  minds 
of  the  men  sworn  to  uphold  it. 

The  citizen  who  conducts  an  orderly  saloon  finds  his  trade  going  to  his 
competitor  who  is  permitted  to  violate  the  law.  He  has  to  pay  the  same  license 
fee  and  he  feels  he  is  being  treated  unjustly.  The  temptation  to  violate  the 
law,  also,  is  strong  in  him.  It  becomes  almost  an  economic  necessity  in  order 
to  keep  his  business.  In  this  way  does  one  saloonkeeper  with  political  influence 
who  openly  violates  the  law,  contaminate  others  until  the  entire  community 
is  affected.  In  this  way  do  we  breed  contempt  for  law  and  order. 

There  are  phases  of  the  problem  included  within  the  scope  of  the  Com- 
mission's inquiry  which  have  hardly  been  touched  upon  up  to  the  present  time. 


However,  much  valuable  data  has  been  collected  so  that  the  Commission, 
though  it  has  far  from  finished  its  classifications  and  analyses,  is  in  a  position 
to  speak  with  some  authority.  The  necessity  for  law  enforcement  is  here 
emphasized  because  it  is  difficult,  or  impossible,  to  point  out  the  weaknesses 
and  defects  in  laws,  the  efficacy  of  which  have  never  really  been  tested.  No 
one  can  say  from  experience  how  far  it  is  possible  to  regulate  the  liquor  indus- 
try under  the  existing  laws,  for  the  reason  that  the  laws  have  not  been  en- 
forced. 

Keeping  in  mind,  therefore,  the  fact  that  laws  and  regulations  are  worse 
than  useless,  unless  they  are  strictly  and  rigidly  enforced  the  Commission  sub- 
mits for  consideration  the  following  recommendations: 

(1)  The  liquor  business  should  be  absolutely  divorced   from  pernicious 
politics — pull,  preference  and  special  privilege. 

(2)  More  care  should  be  exercised  as  to  the  character  of  the  individual 
to  whom  a  license  is  issued.     No  man  ever  convicted  of  a  felony  should  be 
granted  the  privilege  of  conducting  a  soloon. 

The  history  of  revocations  in  this  city  shows  that  the  trouble  has  been 
caused  by  men  of  unfit  character,  who  went  into  the  business  with  the  idea 
of  using  it  as  an  aid  in  furthering  questionable  activities  in  the  field  of  crime 
or  vice.  Certain  sections  of  the  city,  therefore,  attracted  this  type  of  men. 
In  the  past  eleven  years,  to  illustrate,  licenses  of  671  saloons  were  revoked. 
Of  this  total  242  were  in  four  police  precincts.  These  are  the  3rd,  4th,  27th 
and  38th,  immediately  north  and  south  of  the  loop  district.  The  27th,  with  248 
saloons,  had  92  revocations. 

(3)  When  the  holder  of  a  license  has  been  found  guilty  of  a  minor  viola- 
tion of  the  laws  and  ordinances  pertaining  to  the  regulation  of  places  where 
liquors  are  sold,  he  should,  for  the  first  offense,  suffer  a  fine.     For  a  second 
offense  he  should  be  fined  and  have  his  license  suspended  for  a  period  of  thirty 
days.     For  a  third  offense  his  license  should  be  revoked  and  he  should  never 
again  be. granted  a  license  to  engage  directly  or  indirectly  in  the  liquor  busi- 
ness. 

Of  the  671  revocations  in  the  last  eleven  years  all  but  forty-six  were 
restored  .to  the  original  owners  or  to  persons  obtaining  the  saloon  through 
transfer  or  purchase  of  the  license. 

That  the  great  majority  of  men  connected  with  the  saloon  business  are 
themselves  in  favor  of  a  more  drastic  punishment  of  those  responsible  for 
injecting  vicious  factors  into  the  trade  your  Commission  believes  from  the 
following  paragraphs  taken  from  the  answer,  already  mentioned  herewith,  of 
the  Chicago  Brewers'  Protective  Association: 

"We  believe  that  the  public  is  not  interested  in  curtailing  its  own 
liberties  or  restricting  its  own  conveniences,  further  than  to  readjust  cer- 
tain present  circumstances  of  the  liquor  traffic;  and  that  the  agitation  for 
prohibition  proceeds  from  the  persuasion,  which  we  think  wholly  erroneous, 
that  these  circumstances  are  inseparable  from  any  open  conduct  of  retail 
distribution. 

"Among  these  circumstances  may  be  mentioned  the  maintenance  of 
saloons  in  excess  of  the  natural  economic  demand;  the  consequent  artific- 
ial stimulation  of  retail  trade;  questionable  forms  of  entertainment;  stalls, 
snugs,  floor  screens  and  the  like;  insanitary  condition  of  physical  properties; 
exaggerated  advertisement;  and  complication  of  the  retail  traffic  by  in- 
volvement with  problems  of  industrial  efficiency  and  public  health,  as  well 
as  with  more  definite  and  specific  social  evils,  such  as  gambling  and  pros- 
titution, whose  relation  to  it  is  purely  adventitious." 

One  of  the  objects  of  Recommendation  No.  3  and  of  Numbers  4,  5  and  6 
is  to  bring  about  a  gradual  reduction  in  the  number  of  saloons.  There  are  at 
present  too  many,  though  conditions  are  improving.  At  the  time  the  Harkin 
ordinance  was  enacted  there  were  8,097  saloons,  or  one  for  every  239  persons. 
At  the  close  of  the  1916  fiscal  year,  April  30,  1916,  there  were  7,094  saloons,  or 
one  to  every  351  persons. 

The  situation  is  not  satisfactory,  however,  in  many  sections  of  the  city. 
Subtracting  the  sixty-four  square  miles  of  prohibition  territory  gives  us  for 
the  rest  of  the  city  fifty-three  saloons  to  every  square  mile.  And  the  distribu- 
tion of  the  saloons  is  very  unequal.  In  the  First  Ward,  for  instance,  there  is 
one  saloon  for  every  seventy-seven  resident  persons.  This  does  not  include 
or  consider  the  large  business  population  that  enters  the  loop  every  morning 

3 


and  leaves  it  every  evening.     In  the  Eighteenth'  Ward   there   is   one   saloon 

for  every  195  residents  and  in  the  Fifth,  one  for  every  198  residents.     These 

three  wards  have,  respectively,  675;  346  and  336  saloons. 

The  brewers  themselves  are  of  the  opinion  that  the  number  of  saloons 

should  be  reduced,  for  they  say  in  their  answer: 

"For  example,  with  regard  to  possibly  the  most  difficult  problem  of 
all,  we,  ourselves,  are  in  hearty  agreement  with  the  sentiment  for  reducing 
the  number  of  saloons  in  Chicago  to  a  point  within  the  natural  economic 
demand.  A  reduction  of  this  nature  can  gradually,  but  with  a  degree  of 
certainty,  be  accomplished  by  strictly  enforcing  the  present  ordinances. 
All  violations  of  a  cardinal  nature  should  be  cause  for  the  revocation  of 
license  after  an  impartial  hearing  has  been  afforded  the  accused.  No 
license  so  revoked  should  be  restored.  Through  this  method  of  elimination 
resorts  of  disreputable  character  could  not  exist." 

(4)  A  thorough  revision  should  be  made  of  all  saloon  licenses  so  that 
where  saloons  are  being  operated  by  others  than  the  real  owners  and  licensees, 
such  licenses  may  be  revoked. 

The  investigations  of  your  Commission  show  that  6,023  or  85  per  cent  of 
the  saloons,  are  directly  operated  by  the  owners  of  the  city  saloon  license. 
In  547  saloons,  or  eight  per  cent,  the  business  is  carried  on  by  managers  or 
agents  and  in  449  saloons,  or  seven  per  cent,  by  individuals  other  than  licensees 
or  managers  or  agents  of  breweries  or  other  corporations.  Approximately 
70  per  cent  of  the  saloons,  a  total  of  4,952,  are  more  or  less  controlled  by  the 
breweries  through  ownership  of  licenses,  fixtures  or  leases. 

(5)  All  licenses  which  are  not  issued  should  be  cancelled.    There  are  some 
100  licenses,  authorized  under  the  so-called  Harkin  ordinance,  which  have  not 
been  issued.    They  should  be  cancelled. 

(6)  License  fees  should  be  paid  in  full  for  a  year  in  advance,  on  or  before 
the  first  day  of  May.     All  applications  should  be  accompanied  by  the  proper 
bonds  and  certified  checks  and  be  in  the  hands  of  the  City  Collector  on  or 
before  the  date  mentioned.     The  City  Collector  and  the  City  Treasurer  should 
be  required  to  make  a  sworn  statement  of  all  licenses  issued  not  later  than 
May  15  of  each  year.     No  license  should  be  issued  after  May  1  for  that  year. 
Any  license  for  which  no  application,  accompanied  by  the  proper  bonds  and 
certified  check,  has  been  made  on  or  before  May  1  of  each  year,  should  auto- 
matically lapse.     Such  an  arrangement  would  materially  reduce  the  cost  of 
collection. 

In  the  present  fiscal  year  only  fourteen  licenses  were  issued  for  the  twelve 
month  period.  The  rest  were  six  month  licenses.  A  growing  number  of 
licenses,  moreover,  are  not  issued  until  one  or  more  months  after  the  begin- 
ning of  the  six  month  period.  Fifty  per  cent  of  licenses  are  thus  belated. 

(7)  The   display  of  all   signs   of  brewers,   distillers   or  wholesale   liquor 
dealers   on  the  exterior  of  buildings  where  liquors  are   sold,  should   be   pro- 
hibited.    No  signs  of  any  description  should  be  permitted  on  the  exterior  of 
buildings  used  for  saloon  purposes,  except  the  name  of  the  owner  (this  should 
be  mandatory)  and  the  words  "Buffet,"  "Cafe,"  "Saloon"  or  "Bar"  to  denote 
the  character  of  the  business. 

(8)  All  parts  of  the  interior  of  saloons  should  be  kept  well  lighted  and 
the  front  of  such  saloon  should  be  unenclosed   and  unobstructed  except  by 
transparent  window  glass  so  that  a  clear  view  of  the  interior  of  the  premises 
of  such  saloon  may  be  had  at  all  times.    All  screens,  blinds,  curtains  and  other 
obstructions  to  a  free  and  clear  view  of  the  interior  of  the  saloon  should  be 
removed  at  all  times  from  the  entrances   and  windows   of  such  saloon  and 
other  places  where  alcoholic  liquors  are  sold.     No  booths,  stalls,  winerooms, 
closed  or  partially  closed  rooms  of  -any  character  should  be  allowed  in  places 
where  alcoholic  beverages  are  sold.    Open  settees  might  be  installed  in  saloons 
frequented  only  by  men. 

There  are  1,811  saloons  that  have  partitions,  winerooms  and  stalls,  not 
including  kitchens  and  store  rooms.  As  a  related  subject  it  should  be  noted 
that  3,022  saloons  have  direct  connection  with  hotels,  bedrooms  or  private 
rooms,  but  in  the  large  majority  of  cases  these  are  the  living  quarters  of  the 
proprietor.  The  3,022,  of  course,  includes  the  barrooms  of  the  big  loop  hotels. 

(9)  No  gambling  of  any  kind,  or  the  shaking  of  dice  for  drinks  should 
be  permitted  in  places  where  liquors  are  sold.    No  intoxicating  drinks  should 


be  sold  to  minors,  intoxicated  persons  or  to  those  who  have  the  reputation 
of  being  habitual  drunkards. 

(10)  Treating  of  any  kind  among  the  customers  or  patrons  of  a  saloon 
or  the  treating  of  such  customers  or  patrons  by  the  licensee,  bartenders  or 
other  employes  of  the  saloon  should  be  prohibited  and  any  violation  of  this 
prohibition  on  the  part  of  the  licensee,  bartenders  or  other  employes  subject 
his  license  to  revocation.     Where  pool  tables  are  operated  in  connection  with 
saloons,  players  should  not  be  permitted  to  play  for  drinks.     The  use  of  pool 
tables  should  be  charged  for  at  a  stipulated  rate  and  drinks  ordered  by  the 
players  should  be  paid  for  as  would  be  the  case  if  there  were  no  pool  tables 
in  the  place. 

(11)  All  bartenders  regularly  employed  in  places  where  liquors  are  re- 
tailed should  be  licensed.    The  license  fee  should  be  low,  probably  $1.00,  to  be 
renewed  annually.    This  would  not  apply  to  waiters  in  pleasure  resorts  or  in 
cafes   and  restaurants  where   drinks   may   be  served.     The  licensing   of  bar- 
tenders would  give  the  city  regulative  authority  over  such  employes.     Many 
violations  of  law  are  attributed  to  them.     It  would  serve  as  a  protection  to 
saloonkeepers  against  irresponsible  bartenders. 

(12)  No  saloon  should  be  permitted  to  open  in  a  residence  thoroughfare 
between  two  intersecting  streets  where  there  is  no  other  kind  of  store,  whether 
or  not  the  consent  of  property  owners  has  been  obtained. 

Respectfuly  submitted, 

CHICAGO  COMMISSION  ON  THE  LIQUOR  PROBLEM, 

By  Alderman  John  Toman, 

Chairman. 


APPENDIX  A 

Distribution,  Ownership,  Physical  Character- 
istics and  Operation  of  Licensed  Saloons 
in   the   City  of  Chicago 


INFORMATION  COLLECTED 

BY 

LICENSE  OFFICERS  of  the  DEPARTMENT 
OF  POLICE 


STATISTICAL    ANALYSIS    AND    COMPILATION 

PREPARED  for  the  CHICAGO  COMMISSION 

ON  THE  LIQUOR  PROBLEM 


By  J.  L.  JACOBS 

MONADNOCK  BLOCK 
CHICAGO 

JULY    3,    1916 


Chicago,  Ills.,  July  3rd,  1916. 
Honorable  John  Toman,  Chairman, 

Chicago  Commission  on  the   Liquor  Problem, 

Chicago,  Illinois. 
Dear  Sir: — 

In  accordance  with  the  request  of  your  Commisison  on  May  26th,  1916,  I 
have  made  an  analysis  of  the  data  and  information  relating  to  the  distribu- 
tion, ownership,  physical  characteristics  and  operation  of  saloons  within  the 
City  of  Chicago,  which  was  collected  by  the  license  officers  of  the  Department 
of  Police  and  submit  herewith  the  following: 

1:  Detailed  tabulation  (118  sheets  bound  in  separate  part  of  report)  of 
information  and  data  relating  to  the  distribution,  ownership,  physical 
characteristics  and  operation  of  7,094  licensed  saloons  as  included  in  the 
reports  of  the  police  license  officers. 

2:  Report  on  statistical  analysis  and  compilations  of  the  information  in  the 
detailed  sheets  above  referred  to,  with  eighteen  (18)  summary  tables 
and  three  (3)  exhibits. 

I  take  this  opportunity  to  acknowledge  the  co-operation  and  assistance 
given  me  by  the  officials  and  employes  in  the  city  departments  and  bureaus  in 
which  access  to  official  records  and  supplementary  information  was  found  nec- 
essary. I  desire  to  express  special  acknowledgment  and  appreciation  of  co-op- 
eration given  me  by  Mr.  Frederick  Rex,  Secretary  of  your  Commission  and 
Librarian  of  the  Municipal  Reference  Library,  in  which  is  to  be  found  a  fund 
of  valuable  and  easily  obtainable  information. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

J.  L.  JACOBS. 


Statistical  Analysis  and  Compilations 
Distribution,    Ownership,    Physical    Characteristics   and 

Operation   of 

Licensed  Saloons  Within  the  City  of  Chicago 
Collected  by  License  Officers  of  the  Department  of  Police. 

INTRODUCTION. 

The  Chicago  Commission  on  the  Liquor  Problem  was  appointed  on  July 
12th,  1915,  by  the  Mayor  of  the  City  of  Chicago,  upon  order  of  the  City  Coun- 
cil, "to  make  a  comprehensive  study  and  report  on  the  medical,  moral,  political, 
financial  and  economic  and  other  aspects  of  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  in 
Chicago." 

Following  the  organization  of  the  Commission,  a  program  of  procedure  was 
adopted  which  included  the  preparation  and  submission  to  public  and  private 
officials  of  a  series  of  questionnaires  for  the  purpose  of  collecting  such  informa- 
tion and  facts  relating  to  the  various  aspects  of  the  liquor  problem  as  would 
be  of  use  in  this  study. 

Among  these  questionnaires,  the  Commission  prepared  a  set  of  questions, 
the  purpose  of  which  was  to  obtain  definite  and  official  information  on  the 
distribution,  ownership,  physical  characteristics  and  operation  of  the  licensed 
saloons  in  this  city.  No  such  official  information  had  heretofore  been  collected 
and  no  complete  compilation  has  been  prepared  in  this  city  or  insofar  as  it 
has  been  possible  to  find  from  publications  and  records,  in  any  other  city  in 
this  country.  Aside  from  such  uses  the  Commission  would  make  of  this  infor- 
mation, the  compilation  was  deemed  to  be  of  value  for  police  administrative 
purposes,  for  use  of  public  and  civic  organizations  and  for  the  general  edu- 
cation of  the  large  number  of  persons  who  must  be  directly  or  indirectly  inter- 
ested and  concerned  in  these  questions. 

INVESTIGATION   AND   REPORTS   BY    LICENSE   OFFICERS. 

The  questions  prepared  by  the  Chicago  Liquor  Commission  on  this  phase 
of  the  liquor  problem  are  contained  in  Exhibit  "A."  Request  was  made  by  the 
Commission  upon  the  Superintendent  of  the  Police  to  have  the  information  col- 
lected and  reported  on  by  that  division  of  the  Police  Department  which  has  to 
do  with  the  investigation  of  the  character  of  applicants  for  saloon  licenses,  of 
saloon  locations  and  of  the  saloon  business  generally.  An  official  order  was 
issued  by  the  Superintendent  of  Police  on  March  10th,  1916,  directing  that  the 
license  officers  make  such  an  investigation  and  submit  answers  to  the  ques- 
tions for  each  of  the  licensed  saloons  within  their  respective  police  precinicts. 
The  reports  returned  to  the  Commission  were  signed  by  the  license  officers 
making  the  investigations  and  were  approved  by  their  commanding  officers. 
The  reports  were  thus  made  official  and  responsibility  for  completeness  and 
correctness  was  definitely  placed  on  these  civil  service  employes. 

Reports  were  returned  by  the  license  officers  for  each  of  the  7,080  of  the 
7,094  saloons.  The  remaining  14  saloons  were  reported  to  be  out  of  business 
or  had  not  taken  out  licenses  at  the  time  of  the  investigation  on  or  about 
March  15th,  1916.  Licenses  for  these  were  however  issued  before  the  ex- 
piration of  the  license  period  ending  April  30th,  1916. 

ANALYSIS  AND  DETAILED  TABULATION  OF  DATA. 
Following  the  arrangement  of  these  reports  according  to  police  precincts 
and  alphabetically  according  to  the  streets  within  police  precincts,  complete 
tabulation  was  made  of  the  information  included  therein  as  a  basis  for  the 
analysis  and  compilation  of  summary  tables  and  for  use  of  the  Commission  and 
others  for  future  reference.  The  data  included  in  the  separate  reports  has  been 
tabulated  on  the  118  detail  sheets  which  are  submitted  in  separate  part  of  this 

10 


report.  All  the  information  included  in  the  police  license  officers'  reports  is  to 
be  found  on  these  sheets.  An  idea  of  the  detail  involved  in  tabulating  the 
information  on  each  of  the  7,080  license  officers'  reports  can  be  obtained  from 
the  fact  that  approximately  275,000  entries  wer_e  made  on  the  detail  sheets. 
Each  entry  was  subjected  to  a  back  check  and  later  counted  from  one  to  three 
times  in  the  preparation  of  summary  tabulations.  The  headings  on  the  detail 
sheets  above  referred  to  were  arranged  to  include  all  the  answers  to  the  ques- 
tions- sent  out  by  the  Commission,  and  such  additional  related  data  as  was 
obtainable  from  official  records.  The  headings  on  the  detail  sheets  are  as 
follows: 

Columns.  Headings. 

1.  Number  of  Police  Precinct  and  ward. 

2.  Number  of  Saloon  License. 

3.  Address  of  Saloon. 

4.  Name  on  City  saloon  license. 

5.  Owner  of  City  saloon  license. 

6.  Assignment  Recorded. 

7.  Who  operates  and  conducts  saloon? 

8.  Name  on  Government  liquor  license. 

9.  Ownership  of  fixtures  by  licensee. 

10.  Ownership  of  fixtures  by  Owner  of  saloon. 

11.  Ownership  of  fixtures  by  Saloonkeeper  and  Operator. 

12.  Ownership  of  lease  by  Licensee. 

13.  Ownership  of  lease  by  Owner  of  Saloon. 

14         Ownership  of  lease  by  Saloonkeeper  and  Operator. 

15.  Employes — Bartenders. 

16.  Employes — Porters. 

17.  Employes — other  employes. 

18-19.     Revocation — License  Record  at  Present  Location. 
20-21.     Restorations — License  Record  at  Present  Location. 

22.  Distance  to  Schools,  etc.,  if  less  than  250  feet. 

23.  Saloon  Entrances  and  Exits. 

24.  Saloon  Entrances  and  Exits  on  alleys. 

25.  Saloon  Entrances  and  Exits  on  yard  or  open  grounds. 

26.  Saloon  Connections  to  Hotels 

27.  Saloon  Connections  to  Bedrooms  ^Rear,  Side  or  Overhead. 

28.  Saloon  Connections  to  Private  Rooms 

29.  Interior  arrangements — Partitions. 

30.  Interior  arrangements — Stalls. 

31.  Interior  arrangements — Winerooms. 

32.  Interior  arrangements — Tables  in  Barrooms. 

33.  Interior  arrangements — Chairs  in  Barrooms. 

34.  Picnic  or  Palm  Gardens  in  connection. 

35.  Cabarets  run  in  connection. 

36.  Dances  run  in  connection. 

37.  Electric  Pianos. 

38.  Pool  Tables. 

39.  Other  amusements  or  business  run  in  connection. 

40.  License  officer  reporting. 

41.  Remarks. 

SCOPE  OF  STATISTICAL  ANALYSIS. 

Analysis  of  the  data  and  information  included  in  the  reports  of  the  license 
officers  and  set  out  in  the  detail  sheets  present  certain  definite  and  general 
statistical  facts  which  are  of  value  for  police  administration  and  control  and 
are  of  public  interest  and  use  in  setting  out: 

1.  Distribution  of  the  7,094  saloons  within  the  City  of  Chicago:    Informa- 
tion of  saloon  distribution  according  to  police  precincts,  to  political  divisions, 
to  areas  and  nativity,  and  distribution  of  population.    Also  the  receipts  from 
and  issuance  of  saloon  licenses. 

2.  Ownership  or  control  of  the  city  saloon  licenses,  saloon  leases  and 
fixtures  and  government  liquor  licenses,  by  licensees,  breweries,  corporations, 
agents  or  managers,  and  the  percentage  control  of  each. 

3.  Physical  characteristics  of  saloons:   Location  with  reference  to  schools, 
churches  and  other  public  institutions,  exterior  and  interior  arrangements  of 

11 


saloon  premises,  connections  with  hotels,  rooms  and  with  restaurants,  cafes, 
picnic  or  palm  gardens,  and  other  amusements. 

4.  Operation  of  saloons  by  owners,  managers  or  agents,  number  of  persons 
directly  engaged  in  the  saloon  business  in  this  city,  connection  of  the  saloon 
business  with  other  businesses,  such  as  pool  and  billiard  halls,  bowling  alleys, 
restaurants,-  cabarets,  dancing  and  other  amusements;  and  the  history  of  the 
character  of  saloons  and  saloonkeepers  as  shown  by  records  of  revocation  of 
saloon  licenses. 

Analysis  of  the  reports  of  the  license  officers  and  the  detailed  tabulations 
shows  that  for  the  most  part  the  answers  of  the  license  officers  are  definite  and 
relatively  complete.  The  degree  of  completeness  of  the  license  officers'  reports 
can  only  be  determined  after  a  separate  check  or  by  supplementary  inquiry 
through  the  police  department  or  other  similar  body. 

In  several  cases  the  officers  did  not  answer  the  questions  fully  and  the  in- 
formation was  indefinite.  This  applied  particularly  to  the  question  concerning 
the  license  record  of  saloon  keepers  and  saloon  locations,  to  the  question  con- 
cerning direct  connection  of  the  saloons  to  hotels  and  private  rooms,  the  ques- 
tion on  the  number  of  saloons  having  cabarets  and  other  amusements  run  in 
connection  therewith,  and  the  question  relating  to  the  ownership  of  saloon  li- 
censes, leases  and  fixtures,  in  which  case  some  of  the  license  officers  did  not 
give  the  names  of  breweries  or  individuals  or  corporations  owning  or  control- 
ing  same. 

For  the  purpose  of  police  administration  and  for  the  greater  publicity 
and  education  on  the  general  character  and  extent  of  the  saloon  business, 
similar  reports  should  be  made  regularly  by  the  police  license  officers.  Sum- 
mary compilation  of  the  more  important  facts  should  be  made  and  published 
by  the  police  department  in  its  annual  reports.  That  the  information  collected 
in  the  future  be  more  uniform  and  complete,  the  questions  should  be  drawn 
up  in  a  more  specific  form  and  the  license  officers  should  be  instructed  as  to 
the  purpose,  meaning  and  uses  to  be  made  of  same,  previous  to  the  investi- 
gation. 

SUMMARY  TABLES  AND  EXHIBITS. 

Compilations  and  summary  tables  have  been  prepared  from  the  entries  on 
the  detail  sheets.  The  information  and  data  are  presented  in  18  general  sum- 
mary tables  and  two  exhibits,  which  cover  the  following  specific  and  general 
subjects: — 

Part  1 — Distribution  of  saloon  licenses  and  saloons. 

Part  2 — Ownership  and  control  of  saloon  licenses,  fixtures  and  leases. 

Part  3 — Physical  characteristics  of  saloons. 

Part  4 — Operation  of  saloons. 

PART  1. 

Distribution   of   Saloon  Licenses   and  Saloons. 

One  of  the  sections  of  the  Harkin  ordinance  provides  that 

"all  lawful  licenses  issued  and  in  force  on  the  31st  day  of  July,  1906,  for 

"keeping  of  a  saloon  or  dramshop  within  the  City  of  Chicago,  shall  be  re- 

"newed  or  re-issued  upon  strict  and  full  compliance  with  the  laws  and 

"ordinances  in  force  in  the  City  of  Chicago  at  the  time  of  the  application 

"for  such  renewal  of  re-issue,  but  no  new  license    *    *    *    for  the  keep- 

"ing  of  a  saloon  or  dramshop  shall  at  any  time  thereafter  be  granted  or 

"issued  until  the  number  of  licenses  in  force  at  the  time  shall  be  less  than 

"one  for  every  five  hundred  of  the  population  of  the  City  of  Chicago  as 

"ascertained  by  the  then  last  preceding  school  census" 

Table  I  presents  data  obtained  from  official  records  relating  to  the  number 

of  licensed  saloons,  license  fees,  total  estimated  population  of  Chicago  and 

ratios  of  population  to  each  saloon  for  each  of  the  years  immediately  prior  to 

and  since  the  passage  of  the  Harkin  ordinance.     Preceding  the  passage  of  the 

ordinance  there  were  in  existence  8,097  saloons  or  an  average  of  239  people 

to  each  saloon,  the  estimated  population  at  that  time  being  1,941,880.     At  the 

close  of  the  fiscal  license  year,  April  30th,  1916,  the  number  of  licensed  saloons 

was  7,094,  which  with  the  present  estimated  population  of  2,491,939,  makes  the 

ratio  of  population  to  each  saloon,  351. 

Up  to  and  including  June  30th,  1916,  there  have  been  issued  since  the 

12 


beginning  of  the  present  fiscal  saloon  license  year,  viz:  May  1st,  1916,  6,931 
saloon  licenses,  .of  which  6,917  were  semi-annual  licenses  and  14  licenses  were 
issued  for  the  full  year. 

The  number  of  semi-annual  and  annual  saloon  licenses  issued  during  each 
of  the  months  since  the  beginning  of  the  fiscal  year  1910  is  shown  in  Table  II. 
These  figures  show  a  decrease  in  the  number  of  licenses  issued  previous  to 
the  beginning  of  the  license  periods  and  an  increase  in  the  number  of  licenses 
issued  during  the  two  months  following  the  beginning  of  the  periods.  Of  the 
total  of  approximately  7,100  saloon  licenses  issued  each  year,  an  average  of 
3,000  licenses  are  issued  before  the  beginning  of  the  first  period  and  an  aver- 
age of  3,500  licenses  are  issued  before  the  beginning  of  the  second  semi-annual 
period.  Approximately  50%  of  the  total  saloon  licenses  issued  each  semi- 
annual period  are  issued  during  the  month  following  the  beginning  of  the  period 
and  40%  are  issued  immediately  preceding  the  beginning  of  the  license  period, 
the  issuance  of  the  remaining  10%  of  the  saloon  licenses  being  scattered  over 
the  remaining  four  months  of  the  semi-annual  periods. 

Receipts  of  fees  for  saloon  licenses  by  months  and  years  vary  according 
to  the  number  of  licenses  issued.  The  deferring  of  issuance  of  licenses  de- 
creases the  interest  which  the  city  obtains  on  its  deposits  and  gives  to  certain 
owners  of  saloons  privileges  not  enjoyed  by  those  who  pay  their  license  fees 
immediately  preceding  the  beginning  of  license  periods. 

With  the  exception  of  the  fiscal  year  ending  April  30th,  1916,  the  amounts 
received  for  saloon  licenses  during  the  past  seven  years  have  approximated 
$7,150,000.00  each  year,  i.  e.,  7,152  licenses  at  $1,000.00  per  license.  There  was 
a  decrease  of  54  saloon  licenses  issued  during  the  second  license  period  ending 
April  30th,  1916,  reducing  the  total  number  of  renewable  saloon  licenses  to 
7,094.  Up  to  and  including  June  30th,  1916,  6,931  saloon  licenses  had  been 
issued  for  the  license  period  beginning  May  1st,  1916.  The  distribution  of  the 
issuance  of  licenses  and  receipts  by  months  and  years  are  shown  in  Tables 
II  and  III. 

Tables  IV  and  V  present  data  on  the  distribution  of  the  7,094  licensed 
saloons  in  this  city  according  to  police  precincts  and  wards.  They  show  for 
each  precinct  and  ward  the  number  of  licensed  saloons,  the  estimated  popu- 
lation and  areas  and  the  ratios  of  population  and  areas  to  licensed  saloons. 
The  boundaries  of  the  present  police  precincts  and  the  wards  are  shown  In 
Exhibit  "C." 

For  the  purpose  of  police  administration  the  City  of  Chicago  is  divided 
into  26  districts.  These  districts  are  divided  into  police  precincts,  of  which 
there  are  a  total  of  45.  In  some  cases  there  are  two  precincts  within  one 
district,  in  others,  the  boundaries  of  the  precincts  are  co-terminus  with  the 
boundaries  of  the  district.  Following  is  list  of  the  districts  and  the  precincts 
within  the  respective  district  territory. 

Districts                                      Precincts  Districts                                      Precincts 

1    1  14    21-22 

2    2  15    23-25 

3    3  16    24-26 

4    4  17    27 

5    5  18    28-29 

6    10-11  19    30-31 

7    12-13  20    32-33 

8    15-16  21    34-35 

9    9-14  22    36-37 

10    17-18  23    38-39 

11  19-20  24    40-41 

6  25    42-43 

13    7-8  26    44-45 

The  area  in  square  miles  of  the  prohibition,  local  option  and  open  terri- 
tory within  each  police  precinct  and  for  the  entire  City  of  Chicago,  is  shown 
in  Table  IV.  The  divisions  for  the  entire  city  are  as  follows: — 

Prohibition  territory  area 64.089  square  miles 

Local  option  territory  area 62.448  square  miles 

Open  territory  area 72.460  square  miles 

Total  area  city 198.997  square  miles 

13 


In  the  combined  areas  of  the  local  option  and  open  territory,  amounting 
to  134.908  square  miles,  there  were  at  the  close  of  the  saloon  license  period 
ending  April  30th,  1916,  7,094  saloons  or  an  average  of  53  saloons  to  each  square 
mile  of  "wet"  territory. 

The  distribution  of  saloons  within  precincts  according  to  the  estimated 
population  shows  the  greatest  proportion  of  saloons  to  population  within  the 
precincts  in  the  business  section  of  the  city.  For  the  purpose  of  comparison, 
consideration  should  be  given  to  the  transient  population  which  it  is  estimated 
approximates  200,000  persons  per  day  and  which  is  largely  to  be  found  in  these 
sections  of  the  city.  Based  on  the  estimated  population  for  1916,  of  2,491,939, 
there  are  on  an  average  of  351  people  to  each  of  the  7,094  saloons  in  this  city 
which  were  licensed  at  the  beginning  of  the  period  May  1st,  1916. 

For  the  purpose  of  showing  the  distribution  of  licensed  saloons  according 
to  the  political  divisions  in  the  city,  Table  V  has  been  drawn  up.  This  table 
presents  data  on  the  number  of  licensed  saloons  in  each  of  the  wards,  the  ward 
areas  and  the  total  estimated  population  and  the  distribution  of  population 
according  to  nativity  within  each  ward  and  for  the  entire  city.  The  location 
and  boundaries  of  the  wards  are  described  in  Exhibit  "C." 

The  wards  having  over  200  licensed  saloons  are  in  order  as  follows:  — 

Ward  Number  of  Saloons  Ward  Number  of  Saloons 

1st    675  2nd     223 

18th     346  16th     218 

5th    336  14th    214 

8th   295  27th   214 

29th     293  24th    212 

21st     278  4th    209 

17th   271  20th    204 

llth  264  30th    203 

9th   225  22nd     202 

The  3rd,  6th,  7th  and  25th  wards  each  have  less  than  100  licensed  saloons, 
the  number  being  as  follows:  — 

3rd   40      25th     61 

6th     42      7th    64 

According  to  ratio  of  population  to  each  saloon,  exclusive  of  transient  pop- 
ulation, the  order  of  wards  having  less  than  300  people  to  each  saloon  is  as 
follows:  — 

1st    77  people  to  each  saloon 

18th    195  people  to  each  saloon 

5th    198  people  to  each  saloon 

21st    232  people  to  each  saloon 

8th    233  people  to  each  saloon 

llth    263  people  to  each  saloon 

17th    265  people  to  each  saloon 

2nd    290  people  to  each  saloon 

29th    292  people  to  each  saloon 

The  6th,  3rd,  25th  and  7th  wards  have  respectively  1,806,  1,651,  1,443  and 
1,123  people  to  each  saloon. 

PART  2. 

Ownership  and  Control  of  Saloon  Licenses,  Saloon 
Fixtures,  and  Leases  to  Saloon  Premises. 

Statistics  of  the  ownership  and  control  of  city  saloon  licenses,  saloon  fix- 
tures, leases  to  saloon  premises  and  ownership  of  government  liquor  licenses, 
are  given  in  Tables  VI  to  X  inclusive,  according  to  separate  police  precincts 
and  for  the  entire  city. 

Approximately  53%  or  3,698  of  the  7,094  city  saloon  licenses  in  this  city 
are  controlled  or  owned  by  the  licensees;  3,043  saloon  licenses  or  about  43% 
of  the  total  are  owned  by  breweries  and  the  remaining  255  saloon  licenses  or 
approximately  4%  are  owned  by  individuals  other  than  the  licensees  and  brew- 

14 


eries  and  consist  largely  of  persons  who  are  related  to  licensees  or  have  some 
connecticn  with  the  breweries. 

The  leases  to  saloon  premises  are  owned  by  the  holders  of  the  city  licenses 
in  3,847  saloons  or  approximately  58%  of  the  total  number  of  licensed  saloons. 
The  breweries  own  34%  or  2,232  saloon  leases,  296  saloon  leases  are  owned 
by  operators  and  saloon  keepers  other  than  licensees;  209  leases  are  owned 
by  individuals  other  than  licensees,  operators  or  breweries  and  the  scattering 
14  leases  are  owned  by  landlords  other  than  any  of  the  above. 

Breweries  own  fixtures  in  4,689  saloons  or  approximately  67%  of  all  the 
saloons  in  the  city.  1,903  saloon  fixtures  or  approximately  27%  are  owned  by 
the  licensees,  while  the  remaining  6%  or  375  saloon  fixtures  are  owned  by 
operators  and  individuals  other  than  any  of  the  above. 

Approximately  70  per  cent,  or  4,952  licensed  saloons  in  the  city  are  more 
or  less  under  the  control  of  the  breweries,  insofar  as  control  is  obtained  by 
ownership  by  breweries  of  saloon  licenses,  fixtures  and  leases  to  premises  of 
saloons. 

In  1,600  saloons  the  breweries  control  and  own  the  combination  of  the  city 
saloon  license,  fixtures  and  leases  to  saloon  premises.  In  1,206  saloons  the 
breweries  control  and  own  both  the  saloon  license  and  fixtures.  In  27  saloons 
the  breweries  own  both  city  saloon  license  and  leases  to  premises.  The  combi- 
nation of  saloon  fixtures  and  leases  are  owned  by  breweries  in  551  saloons.  In 
1,322  saloons  the  breweries  own  fixtures  alone.  In  209  saloons  and  in  37  saloons 
the  breweries  own  the  city  saloon  licenses  or  the  leases  respectively. 

City  saloon  licenses  own  the  government  liquor  licenses  in  6,086  cases  out 
of  the  total  number  of  7,094  saloons.  The  remaining  927  or  13  per  cent,  of 
the  government  liquor  licenses  are  owned  by  persons  designated  as  managers, 
agents  or  operators  of  saloons  and  by  individuals  other  than  any  of  these  or 
the  licensees. 

PART  3 
•  Physical  Characteristics  of  Saloons. 

The  data  furnished  by  the  police  license  officers  in  answer  to  the  questions 
relating  to  the  physical  characteristics  of  saloons,  was  not  entirely  definite  or 
complete.  Tables  XI  to  XIV,  inclusive,  present  information  by  police  precincts 
and  for  the  entire  city  on  the  proximity  of  saloons  to  schools,  churches  and 
public  buildings;  the  exterior  and  interior  arrangements  of  saloon  premises, 
their  connection  with  hotels,  rooms  and  with  restaurants,  cafes,  palm  gardens 
and  other  amusements  and  businesses. 

A  total  of  about  366  saloons  in  this  city  are  nearer  than  250  feet  to  schools, 
churches  and  other  public  buildings.  Of  this  number  at  least  140  saloons  are 
within  this  distance  to  schools,  172  to  churches  and  29  to  other  public  institu- 
tions. Twenty-five  other  saloons  are  near  similar  buildings,  the  character  of 
which  are  not  specifically  set  out  in  the  reports. 

Besides  the  entrances  and  exits  which  saloons  have  on  the  main  streets  and 
thoroughfares,  the  reports  show  that  1,553  saloons  have  entrances  and  exits  to 
yards  or  open  grounds,  and  1,041  saloons  have  entrances  and  exits  to  alleys. 

Table  XIII  shows  that  there  are  a  total  number  of  3,022  saloons  which  have 
direct  connections  to  either  hotels,  bedrooms  or  private  rooms  which  are  either 
in  the  rear,  side  or  over  the  saloon  proper.  Of  this  total  1,527  have  such  connec- 
tions in  the  rear,  1,364  overhead  and  about  20  on  the  side  of  the  saloon 'proper. 

Information  furnished  by  the  license  officers  with  reference  to  the  existence 
of  partitions,  stalls  and  wine  rooms  within  saloons  was  found  to  be  indefinite, 
due  possibly  to  the  fact  that  the  officers  had  different  ideas  as  to  the  meaning 
of  partitions,  wine-rooms,  etc.  For  this  reason  Table  XIV  has  been  drawn  up 
to  show  the  totals  rather  than  the  separate  numbers  of  saloons  having  parti- 
tions, those  having  wine-rooms  and  those  having  stalls. 

The  reports  show  that  1,811  saloons  have  such  partitions,  wine-rooms  and 
stalls.  In  addition  to  these  there  are  about  136  saloons  which  have  similar 
rooms  and  partitions  which  are  used  as  store-rooms  and  kitchens.  There  are 
also  471  saloons  which  run  restaurants  and  cafes  in  connection  with  the  saloon 
business  and  63  saloons  have  picnic  or  palm  gardens  run  in  connection  with 
the  saloons. 

The  data  with  reference  to  the  number  of  saloons  having  tables,  chairs  or 
settees  in  the  bar-room  does  not  seem  to  be  complete,  the  total  number  shown 
being  286  out  of  a  total  of  over  7,000  saloons. 

15 


Part  4. 
Operation  of  Saloons. 

Tables  XV  to  XVIII,  inclusive,  present  statistics  on  the  operation  of  the 
7,094  licensed  saloons  in  this  city.  Approximately  85  per  cent.,  or  6,023  licensed 
saloons  in  the  city  are  shown  to  be  operated  and  conducted  by  the  owners  of 
the  city  saloon  licenses;  547  of  the  saloons  or  about  8  per  cent.,  are  operated 
and  conducted  by  managers  or  agents,  and  449  saloons  or  about  7  per  cent,  are 
operated  by  individuals  other  than  licensees  or  managers  or  agents  of  corpora- 
tions or  breweries. 

The  reports  of  the  license  officers  in  all  cases  give  the  names  and  ad- 
dresses of  operators  and  saloonkeepers,  and  of  bartenders,  porters  and  other 
employes  engaged  by  them.  The  total  number  of  persons  directly  engaged  in 
the  saloon  business  in  this  city  is  shown  to  be  17,882.  Of  this  number  5,609  are 
bartenders,  2,734  are  porters  and  1,889  are  miscellaneous  employes,  making  a 
total  of  10,232  employes.  In  addition,  there  are  6,392  individual  owners  and 
629  corporations  or  partnerships,  the  members  of  which  are  operators  and  are 
directly  engaged  in  the  saloon  business.  Assuming  that  an  average  of  two 
persons  are  engaged  in  the  operation  and  conduct  of  saloons  where  the  owner- 
ship lay  in  a  partnership  or  corporation,  the  total  number  of  owners  and 
operators  of  saloons  is  7,650. 

In  a  large  number  of  saloons  and  particularly  in  those  located  in  the  sec- 
tions of  the  city  where  the  foreign  population  predominates,  the  license  officers' 
reports  show  that  the  wives  of  saloon  keepers  assist  in  the  carrying  on  of  the 
business.  These  have  not  been  included  in  the  totals  of  owners  and  employes 
engaged  in  the  saloon  business. 

The  reports  of  the  license  officers  on  the  number  and  character  of  amuse- 
ments run  in  connection  with  saloons,  are  not  as  definite  and  complete  as 
might  be  desired.  The  information  is  incomplete,  particularly  with  reference 
to  the  saloons  having  cabarets,  restaurants  and  cafes  in  connection.  The  re- 
ports show  that  there  are  about  4,550  amusements  and  businesses  run  in  con- 
nection with  the  7,094  saloons.  Of  this  number  approximately  633  have  restau- 
rants, cafes  and  cabarets  and  in  addition  242  similar  amusements  or  businesses 
which  are  not  specifically  designated  in  the  license  officers'  reports.  Seven 
hundred  and  eighteen  or  about  10  per  cent,  of  the  total  saloons  have  connections 
to  rooms  or  halls  in  which  dancing  is  permitted.  Electric  pianos  are  to  be 
found  in  2,420  of  all  the  saloons,  89  saloons  having  bowling  alleys  and  448 
have  pool  and  billiard  tables. 

Because  the  ownership  of  saloons  usually  changes  where  the  saloon  license 
has  been  revoked  and  then  restored,  the  reports  of  the  license  officers  were 
not  adequate  in  this  respect.  Records  in  the  office  of  the  Mayor  and  in  the 
Department  of  Police  show  that  during  the  past  11  years  there  have  been  671 
revocations  of  saloon  licenses,  all  of  which  with  the  exception  of  46,  were 
restored  to  the  original  owners  or  to  persons  obtaining  the  saloon  through 
transfer  or  purchase  of  the  license.  The  names  of  the  owners  and  addresses 
of  saloons  at  the  time  of  revocation  of  the  licenses,  dates  of  revocation  and 
restoration  of  the  licenses,  and  the  location  within  police  precincts,  are  shown 
in  Exhibit  "B." 

For  the  purpose  of  showing  the  general  character  of  saloons,  an  analysis 
was  made  of  the  number  of  revocations  of  saloon  licenses  during  the  past  11 
years.  Table  XVIII  shows  the  distribution  of  saloon  license  revocations  accord- 
ing to  precincts.  The  largest  number  of  revocations  are  shown  to  be  in  police 
precincts  3,  27,  38  and  4.  These  precincts  have  the  following  records: 

27th  Precinct — 248  saloons  with  92  revocations 
3d  Precinct — 168  saloons  with  65  revocations 

38th  Precinct — 259  saloons  with  57  revocations 
4th  Precinct — 112  saloons  with  28  revocations 

These  precincts,  as  shown  in  Exhibit  "C,"  are  located  immediately  north 
and  south  of  the  central  loop  district. 


16 


TABLE  I 

-TATISTICS  OF  NUMBER  OF  LICENSED  SALOONS,  LICENSE  FEES,  TOTAL  POPULATION 

OF  CHICAGO  AND  RATIOS  OF  POPULATION  TO  EACH  SALOON  FOR  EACH  OF  THE 

YEARS  IMMEDIATELY  PRIOR  TO  AND  SINCE  THE  PASSAGE  OF  THE  HARKIN 

ORDINANCE. 


Fiscal  Year 

(See 

Number  of 
Licensed 

Annual 
License 

Population  of 
Chicago  based 

Ratio  of 
Population  to 

Note  1) 

Saloons 

Fee 

on  U.  S.  Census 

each  Saloon 

1905 

8,097 

$  500 

1,941,880 

239 

1906 

7,353 

1000 

1,990,541 

270 

1907 

7,226 

1000 

2,039,202 

282 

1908 

7,180 

1000 

2,087,862 

290 

1909 

7,152 

1000 

2,136,525 

298 

1910 

7,152 

1000 

2,185,283 

305 

1911 

7,152 

1000 

2,238,344 

313 

1912 

7,152 

1000 

2.298,711 

321 

1913 

7,152 

1000 

2,346.018 

329 

1914 

7,152 

1000 

2,393,325 

335 

1915 

7,150 

1000 

2,442,632 

341 

1916 

7,094 

1000 

2,491,939 

351 

1917 

6,931    (See 

1000 

Note  2) 

NOTES:     (1)     Fiscal  year  for  saloon  licenses  is  from  May  1st  to  April  30th,  inclusive.     Semi-annual 
periods  begin  on  May  1st  and  November  1st. 
(2)     Includes  saloon  licenses  issued  up  to  and  including  June  30,  1916. 

In  addition  to  these,  the  issuance  of  13  licenses  have  been  withheld  by  the  City  Clerk  pending 
payment  of  amounts  due  the  city  by  the  applicants  for  the  saloon  licenses. 

The  City  Collector  has  also  accepted  a  number  of  checks  for  saloon  licenses  which  had  not 
been  issued  on  June  30,  1916,  and  which  it  is  claimed  are  being  held  pending  investigation.  A 
portion  of  these  checks  have  been  deposited  with  the  City  Treasurer. 


17 


03 


— 

rj 

CO 

— 

13 

«D      t-> 

=  ^ 

0 

a 

Os 

OS 

s 

OS       Cs 

^> 

0 

<N 

co 

4- 

0       W 

8 

S 

OS 

OS 

c-- 

OS       CS 

3 

0 

r 

I 

•>  5^ 

r^ 

g 

IN 

O 

s 

s 

0       W« 
O       Os  o 

' 
» 

f. 

=•« 

•^ 

Tl 

OS     .           . 

I 

& 

;/. 

o 

• 

. 

« 

^' 

•J 

p: 

Csl 

IQ 

ts- 

o 

•* 

CO       CM 

J 

< 

D 

B 

^ 

* 

B 
< 

•s> 

00 

t^ 

CN 

c 

>O       <N 

,j 

CO 

*—\ 

X      Cs 

i 

• 

3 

'S 

O 

a 

•s°°-|  • 

*r 

Z 
*~> 

sS  15. 

^ 

a 
fe 

n 

^! 

" 

§s 

CO          • 

3 

_x 

•n 

-^ 

Cl 

t~ 

t. 

f~ 

>-s 

1C 

IN 

£ 

1-1 

•o 

a 

g 

0 

£ 

» 
1 

0 

G 

'O 

0 

1 

§ 

OS 

§ 

cc 

S     : 

?; 

3 

o 
£ 

g 

o 

0 

IN 

1 

CO 

t- 

j 

< 

en 

CO 

CO 

CN 

C~l 

S 

< 

tJ 

C 

§ 

re 

o 

'-2 

I 

O 
•* 
•* 

o 
(« 

•M 

CO 

j 

Q 

* 

CO 

CO 

c^ 

co 

o. 

vP 

? 

;.e 

oB 

"o   • 

"o   • 

g 

ti 

a 

(M 

CO 

IN 

CO 

3     : 

•g 

•c 

i 

- 

00 

o 

2 

CO 

OJ           • 

1 

| 

g 

? 

s 

S 

^ 

•- 

s"" 

i 

CS 

s 

01        CS  1C 
O       OS-" 
CO       U5  O 

K 

P; 

1 

2 

t^ 

O 

CO 
K* 

CS       OS 
00       CO 

?0 

CO 

CN 

co 

*  « 

c. 

n 

i 

cc 

« 

?» 

g 

•* 

3 

CO 

t-.       CS 

CO        ^J* 
O       01 
Cl       CM 

H 

M 

CO 

»•" 

10 

*        *""  «B 

| 

j| 

0 

0 

CS 

cs 

c. 

O       CS  o 

.1 

.2 

1 
O 

J, 

1 

CO 

4. 

7    72: 

us      eo'~' 

-. 

0 

OS 

CS 

a 

Cs      cs 

c  as 


os  o 
o'-'.Q 


•5     *£' 

COS* 


- 


S  r1 

H  O 


~  Q 


§OO^-1»-lr-li— «p-4»— ( 
CSOSOsOSOsOSOfCS 

8QOCOCPOOO 
pppOCDOOOCD 
§'cOOOOOC3QOCO 
OOOOOQOQOO 

rH  O)  •*  t^  Tf  OHO 

N 

oooooSooSos 


Oi  t>T  -H"  lC  t-T  10  O  •*  tO  00 


8888S8 


OOO 
OOO 


JOOOOOOPOOO 
;qqqqqooppo 
'pdcJocJododis 

^Soooocoooo 


Ocsoot-cci^-ooioco 


oooeoooooccoe 
ooqqqqqqqqcoc 
-<ppdpdpppo6c 

i-oeooJSScccec 


rHCOts->OOST*C^iOTj'CO 
OOlNOOCOCOlOCOtOO--! 


8      888  :88 


••HO       -oTto 


•88  -8  -888 


8883S 


oqcqoscq 
oooT^oioo 


ts-t-t»ts-b- 


-H  01  CO  •*  iO 


00  Is-  ts-  t>-  ts. 


c  — 

C3o 


IS 


18 


o.2-g  s 

.2jrS§ 


2-    s 


WOn 


II 


CO  O  t^  O  --S  -i  ffl  >0  O  30  -I-  CO  •-  1  1~  U5  c^  01 


<NMO»OiC*C*KCN<N(NCOCOCO:O:OCOCOCCCOC'5Tii*'VTi«^'»r 


i  00  g|  »  00     •CO"5QO1«-<»"OO5^  -H'< 


O  i-l  rl  CO  N  •<(( 


NN*  W  >S  ^<  O»  rH  CO  X5  (O  00  "*  •*  "5  N  M  (O     -Q  h-  "O  !OOO  «5  USt»O^<  O 
.-1  1-1  Tf       CO       00  "3  ^  O5  •O'  »  TJ<  O  «O  C<5  O5  TJ<     •  O  t^  W  t^  "S-HN  O>  iH  00  5 


»     S 

C3y~  CO  »-i  •— I  !•*  *•!  ""^  i-*  iH  i-l       O)       MCOWC^COi^rHi— ic^i 

! 

N  06  I-i  >5 1- <S  ^i  r-<  o  "5 1^  I-<  co  t~  56  r-<  ^  ®  co  ^  co  lo  fi  p  c»  c 

u5pi/5O"5®pcoco    •    •    -i-iio   •    -ooo   "nPcooooo-g'co'O^pp    -o:oo:opp»5ppr»ioooM 

a>  **        P  P  I— I  P  r^t  »H  f-H  *— ( i— I      •     •      •  P  f-H      •     •  C^  P      •  iH  i^  i-HOi  f*  CO  pH  P  i-H  rH  M      •  C<  »•*  M  CO  P  CO  I-*  P  i^  i^  **  *N  c*4 

O  " 

% 

a 

I       5t?         •    *NCO     •     -CpQ     •C<IC^QOC'l'-H^HO»OCOTt<     •     •     «C^W §00     •§     • 

»»  -     -FHO     •     *OO     •^HOOt^COCOt^C^JC^'^'-^     •     •     •rHO»-^ *     •     •     •     »O4t>»     »35 

OO    •    -OCO    •  O  O  »H  iO  O^*  ^*^*  00  N  iO    •    •    *OOO OO    -O 

«8  S          *     *  ^H       *^ 

w 

§5 

p 
5 

'§1 

"       PPP     -PPPP»C^?4M-HI>ICOPPC<PPPPPP     -P     -PPPCOPPPPCSC^PPPPPPNCO 

w    IS' 


sS£ 


—       «3  O  4> 

g     a'-S^JS 


1  1  2-s-g 


s   -"  §  3 

^  3  Uli 


•S§g 


i465S|f 


•  03  —   O~  •« 

•n  5   rf  •**  3  S  • 


ill 

1*1 


19 


1 

a       e» 


33® 


;  i.-  c  ~  c  c-j  re  ri  c~.  '-c  oc  —  —  ~:  —  'c  c.  -r  o 
)  -,=  r:  —  s.  —  ~i  rt  ro  o  ^:  «r  cc  ^r  :-:  rj  —  cc  x 


^  —  <  c/3  >c  i  -  c>  —  "t  rs.  i-  >^  n 
r  re  —  -r  T  r:  r<  rt  •  ~  >••;  i-  — 


lO  i-l  OO»  00  5O  Ol  N  M  CO  t-  >O  ^<  O  00  •-<  00  O»«5  O3  O5  00  O  O  00  N  O  <O  M  WO  00  iH  i-l  T 


IN  ri  (N       «  Ol  <-i  <N  W  --1  f-i  i-c  1-1  ^H 


•da  t  -  - 

o  o  c. 
^;  '.5  <o     ••         ii^^i^srsa;^:^^"*^:^:^^:^'^-!;!!;^^^:^;^::::-^:1^:^^^;!.^^!;!;  m  *"-'3 . 

JisJl 

g   X  »H        ,-i  CN  *T  »-w  cv  ^w  «w  *•*  wj  tv  c>i  fji  w  w  V  C^  <-«->  "  n  J  ' — '  (.N  •^^  "^r1  <^j  i.v  wj  i-*  <^>  ^A;  *^v  tv  «j  ^w  «j  i-^  w*  —  Q    G,     " 

W(2  •  - 

O  O  OOO  O  O  O  O        O 

Z,       tt*    K  !z 

9  S>  '"Si 

o 

O  g  C  g 

.  M  pH  rt  i-l  i-l  M  i-H  r-l      •      •      -OrHi-l      •      •!-(      •      -i-l      •      •  rH  i-l  i-l  rH  i-l  i-l  PH  r4  C4  i-l      •  (N      •  -*  — '    * 

CCi-i  N  i-lNTl<       '  •  N*"1    •  -^  O'- 

Cj   0*3          >»_0  -55        X 

OOOSi-KN     -i-il^     -IN     ••*     -i-lOCOt~00     •     -CCNiH     .  O  «£j3        oS"3^^ 

iH  -CO  Wi-l-  CO»O'  •  •  -!-lO*i-l  ••  •  f-l  —  -M    0  C.^-^*'"-x 

§32    1«&2N^^ 

Z  •    •    -t»N     •    •     -CO     -in     •    •     •     "H     •     •    -CO tO r4  ^OOg:        Sgj^g^o^ 

;S  QJ  n      >II- 

IH   -i-iNt-   -co   •  N os IH i-i o co to t^ T»I 05 , 

M.I    WM®2-H    PH    MiHW(N2U5'-|'<i-1      rt  °*    ,.,  ,N  2  2 "°  °  *  •      °      .^2  o    "8.2  Ss  i  •.« 

So  12*    fl«3|&^ 

vP  ^^      »^H      «^H^H      •^HCON^^^^      •C^^*^^*^^1^^HC^^HOT™tC^FH      'fHpHC^N      •      -^HrH^H      •  ^H  C          "^         "o£;CCc.i 

£ 

•^•^NININ 

•     •     -Ni-l      •     •     -1-<«OCO<O     •     •!-!      •      •     •     •*> iHi-IMi-l     -iHi-ITjlp-1 

.    „  ...  ...        re  i-iT 

• 

US  •  iH  CO  *«  r-l  i-l  W  U)  CO  tO  CO  i-l  CO  •*  CO  t-  »H  I-H  p  ft  N  i-l  (N  i-l  i-l  N  N  CO  (N  iH  -rHC 

ut!ouomy      Sco*   '   'ro>~1 co   •   •   -i-i   •   -i-ii-i OUJIH 

'a>s6i;Hc5'O«6cMC'i~~«HMU3'<jtpH*H~~usi-t" 

INN  "         "         "   ~~IN"«         N^i  •  ^"^     "a? 


CO 


Tot 
Ave 

age 


n  the  busi 
icense  offi 


larg 
poli 


13  III 

_,      «         o-^ 

11  .a>     psj  § 


20 


K  ? 
2 

- 


t-         3  *« 

JJ.i     M     0> 


«     -a 

G        o 


O   i  T3  § 

IE§§ 


SOOr-ji 
OCOM 


I-H   •  co  co  1-1  1~  co  TH 


.  IN  oo  r-  --i  r>.   •»   -owoor^ 


•  IM  >«  O  -f<  O5 


CO  t^  (O  -H  T)I  00  _i  00  IM  rH  t^  CO  tO  •*  O5  O  Tf  cc  -< 


s;2^: 


»•  3  9  3  9  >3 

'•''' 


«i 

CSj 

r   d 


H°l      I 


21 


86 
.-.a 

II 


O  a 


Ho 


ill! 


§J 

111 

3        C 

a  < 


.00  -M   •   -c«5»c>aoo>Moo   -^ 


ii-i  •  •<-!  -t)  -fUiaci 


22 


Ili! 


«    B 


1! 


a      a> 

9  4*5 

III 

3        C 

O1    < 


iHN:<STj<i!5cot,acOiC'*MCO<<iO<Or~aOOSOi-iNC<5^'«5«ei— OOOlOi-iCNMflflCCt^OOCSOi-iWW^'US 

-,F-i^,rti-ii-ir-ii-ii-ii-icxe<ic>iP4CMMC-)MMMCccocccorcccccccMf7-w'<rwr 


*4  >«<]  9  O 


•<«•  W  CO  <N  CO  IN  r-4  IH  CO  i«  CO  •*  M  i-l  i-l       <N  CJ  C*  IN  .-I  CO  IN  IN 


-*NOOtOOON     •mr-CC^i-iie 
•*  C<5  CO  W  CO  M     •  PI  N  W  r-i  1-1  ^-i 


CC  !N  W  IN  CM  CM  CO 


"5  •*  N  W  •*  O  CO  i-l 


-O»     -i-llfl    •  Tf  1-1  IN  -H  •*  ^f  «O  N  O  i-l  • 
...  »HCO       i-lCO 


'NOtOWW     •  <O  "5  •-"  C«  M  f  iH  i-l 


•  N     •    •    •     'CO     'i-lFN     •NMNi-l- 


U5  M  i-l       i-l  PI  O*  1-1 


O  (N  CO  ^"  OJ  V  • 


"J'aO^''^l>.»BOOO 
•  O5  ffl  ^>  ^<  i-l  •-<  C5  f 


—  N     •l»O<S 


>•-««•*  >«;« 


23 


I  a 


3 

c^  Zv0 


Is 


1 

M  a 


S  —  2 
•-n-i 


•  •-<  N  IN  -c  ^  -H  ^       CO       i-l—l 


5-<     .  <*  i-H  00 


•OOQCOSOWOOO  — t^tOW«OOOr^W*l«0     .^ON^OIN-J-^ 

-^i  •* -1- CO  CO 'H  CO  >O  t^  CO  M -^ -" -H  (N  ^       CO    •  O9  «O  •*  "5  *       CO  -I 


i-ico   •N«^>ooO'<r     i-ct 


24 


II 


o  s 

>. 

pa 

« 


I    1 

._*.*»  g) 

I  li 

9     a 

a  -3 


tO  N  W  N  •* 


W  O  00  •*  "5  -"  •*  O  •<"     •  (O  00  b.  00  IN.  O  00 


^OON^W     •rtTfrt     -IN     .t-l 


-NN     •C»t-CSl*CSCv»O>OOO»OeOCOi-l 


"5 N oo «a •-" • 


^i  ^  O  -H  Tjl  00 
tH 


-1O     .^(lO<"i-li-IN     '.I 


tO  00  •*  (O  t^  ^  t 


tHCOiH^H      •  1-1  "^  CO  CO  CO  •-»  00  ^^  »-<  i^  ••*  <^      •  CO  I-*  i-t  ^^  i^  f-(  W        t^  *H 


>^NNi-IM        iH  <-l  N  i-l  i-l  i-<        W  N  <-l  N  il        CM>-ll-li-« 


"°5 
g  c 

^ 

!£ 


25 


TABLE  XI 

NUMBER  OF  SALOONS   NEARER  THAN  250  FEET  TO  SCHOOLS.  CHURCHES  OR  OTHER 

PUBLIC  BUILDINGS. 


SALOONS  NEARER  THAN  250  FEET 

Police 

Licensed 

To  Other 

To  Public 

Precinct 

Saloons 

To 

To 

Public 

Buildings 

Total 

Schools 

Churches 

Buildings 

not  Specified 

1 

332 

2 

177 

'i 

'7 

'& 

3 

168 

1 

'4 

'i 

5 

11 

4 

112 

1 

1 

1 

2 

5 

5 

145 

1 

2 

3 

6 

6 

184 

8 

8 

16 

7 

118 

1 

1 

8 

82 

'i 

3 

4 

9 

21 

10 

17 

t  f 

11 

75 

'i 

'i 

'2 

12 

65 

13 

69 

'2 

'2 

14 

143 

'3 

3 

6 

15 

199 

3 

10 

13 

16 

95 

1 

a  . 

1 

17 

242 

18 

34 

19 

219 

i 

20 

341 

'3 

4 

7 

21 

277 

11 

13 

"e 

'i 

31 

22 

204 

12 

19 

2 

33 

23 

350 

7 

19 

i 

t  . 

27 

24 

108 

10 

6 

2 

18 

25 

164 

2 

3 

,  , 

5 

26 

133 

3 

3 

f 

6 

27 

248 

3 

2 

1 

'2 

8 

28 

138 

4 

1 

2 

7 

29 

116 

1 

,  . 

,  . 

1 

30 

126 

1 

i 

t  , 

2 

31 

32 

378 

16 

12 

'2 

'3 

27 

33 

255 

27 

18 

45 

34 

197 

1 

6 

2 

9 

35 

236 

'i 

1 

36 

158 

'i 

1 

37 

101 

38 

259 

'i 

'i 

i 

'i 

7 

39 

177 

4 

5 

9 

40 

130 

11 

7 

8 

26 

41 

183 

3 

5 

^  f 

8 

42 

99 

3 

6 

9 

43 

103 

3 

1 

4 

44 

98 

.  ^ 

45 

4 

Note  (1) 

14 

.. 

Totals  

7094 

140 

172 

29 

25 

366 

NOTE:  (1)  Total  of  14  saloons  for  which  licenses  had  not  been  issued,  or  which  were  out  of  business 
at  the  time  of  the  investigation  by  police  license  officers.  Licenses  for  these  were  issued  before 
expiration  of  period,  viz.:  April  30,  1916. 


TABLE  XII 

NUMBER  OF  SALOONS  HAVING  DIRECT  ENTRANCES  AND   EXITS  TO  ALLEYS,  YARDS, 
OR  OPEN  GROUNDS,  IN  ADDITION  TO  STREET  ENTRANCES  AND  EXITS. 


SALOON  ENTRANCES  AND  EXITS 

Number  of 

Saloons 

Questions 

To  Yards 

Police 

Licensed 

Reported 

Not 

or  Open 

Precinct 

Saloons 

Closed 

Answered 

Grounds 

To  Alleys 

1 

332 

2 

1 

71 

2 

177 

.  . 

'8 

80 

3 

168 

'i 

,  , 

13 

32 

4 

112 

3 

17 

41 

5 

145 

4 

13 

20 

6 

184 

62 

7 

7 

118 

13 

26 

8 

82 

'i 

50 

14 

9 

21 

. 

7 

4 

10 

17 

7 

2 

11 

75 

'i 

16 

15 

12 

65 

1 

t 

32 

8 

13 

69 

8 

4 

14 

143 

82 

7 

15 

199 

'i 

64 

19 

16 

95 

. 

39 

1 

17 

242 

'5 

. 

26 

16 

18 

34 

27 

2 

19 

219 

'4 

160 

35 

20 

341 

5 

i 

7 

100 

21 

277 

8 

. 

69 

35 

22 

204 

17 

50 

23 

350 

, 

113 

31 

24 

108 

23 

13 

25 

164 

. 

47 

1 

26 

133 

. 

53 

16 

27 

248 

'i 

, 

36 

40 

28 

138 

44 

14 

29 

116 

15 

13 

30 

126 

'i 

75 

11 

31 

. 

32 

378 

'i 

24 

74 

33 

255 

71 

21 

34 

197 

'i 

'i 

8 

21 

35 

236 

,  , 

27 

35 

36 

158 

'3 

.  . 

64 

9 

37 

101 

i 

,  , 

73 

38 

259 

11 

55 

39 

177 

i 

32 

25 

40 

130 

18 

16 

41 

183 

"2 

'i 

24 

42 

42 

99 

.  . 

51 

9 

43 

103 

2 

.  . 

.  . 

6 

44 

98 

.  . 

.  . 

3 

.  . 

45 

4 

.  . 

.  . 

4 

.  . 

Note  (1) 

14 

Totals 

7094 

51 

5 

1553 

1041 

NOTE:  (1)  Total  of  14  saloons  for  which  licenses  had  not  been  issued  or  which  were  out  of  business  at 
the  time  of  the  investigation  by  police  license  officers.  Licenses  for  these  were  issued  before 
expiration  of  license  penod  ending  April  30,  1916. 


27 


TABLE  XIII 

NUMBER  OF  SALOONS  HAVING  DIRECT  CONNECTIONS  TO  HOTELS  AND  ROOMS. 

(See  Note  1). 

HOTELS  AND  ROOMS  HAVING  DIBECT  CONNECTIONS 


Police 
Precinct 

H  uuiuer  ui 

Licensed 
Saloons 

OUIW11B 

Reported 
Closed 

Side 

Overhead 

Rear 

Location 
.  Not 
Specified 

Total 

1 

332 

2 

5 

25 

30 

2 

177 

'i 

1 

17 

19 

3 

168 

'i 

3 

9 

'3 

3 

18 

4 

112 

3 

29 

10 

2 

41 

5 

145 

4 

'i 

2 

1 

1 

5 

6 

184 

22 

113 

135 

7 

118 

^  f 

88 

70 

158 

8 

82 

'i 

50 

31 

81 

9 

21 

.  . 

13 

8 

21 

10 

17 

,  . 

'i 

1 

11 

75 

'i 

12 

65 

i 

'2 

's 

23 

33 

13 

69 

20 

20 

14 

143 

'e 

27 

33 

15 

199 

'i 

'i 

150 

74 

225 

16 

95 

. 

2 

33 

46 

81 

17 

242 

5 

1 

19 

2 

22 

18 

34 

11 

0 

^  t 

20 

19 

219 

'4 

i 

12 

66 

9 

79 

20 

341 

5 

2 

238 

254 

492 

21 

277 

8 

18 

35 

~2 

55 

22 

204 

'i 

49 

138 

9  t 

188 

23 

350 

54 

253 

307 

24 

108 

29 

22 

.  . 

51 

25 

164 

'2 

15 

100 

117 

26 

133 

i 

27 

28 

27 

248 

'4 

55 

1 

*3 

59 

28 

138 

7 

•  . 

B  , 

7 

29 

116 

'i 

.  f 

,  , 

1 

30 

126 

'i 

,  . 

52 

16 

68 

31 

.  .  . 

32 

378 

'i 

-3 

53 

'2 

58 

33 

255 

24 

1 

.  . 

26 

34 

197 

'i 

88 

44 

132 

35 

236 

36 

158 

'3 

.  . 

.  . 

.  . 

.  . 

37 

101 

i 

'i 

8 

9 

38 

259 

35 

8 

43 

39 

177 

8 

*3 

11 

40 

130 

16 

8 

'3 

26 

41 

183 

'2 

145 

57 

202 

42 

99 

38 

8 

46 

43 

103 

'2 

'i 

46 

23 

,  f 

70 

44 

98 

,  , 

a  , 

.  . 

45 

4 

.  . 

4 

'i 

,  . 

5 

Note  (2) 

14 

•• 

Totals 


7094 


51 


19 


1364 


1572 


67 


3022 


NOTES:     (1)     Information  furnished  by  police  license  officers  on  this  subject  is  mot  uniform  and  is  in- 
complete. 

(2)  Total  of  14  saloons  for  which  licenses  had  not  been  issued  or  which  were  out  of  business 
at  the  time  of  the  investigation  by  police  license  officers.  Licenses  for  these  were  ifsued 
before  expiration  of  license  period  ending  April  30,  1916. 


28 


TABLE  XIV 

NUMBER  OF  SALOONS   HAVING  PARTITIONS,  STALLS,   WINE  ROOMS,   RESTAURANTS, 
CAFES  OR  PICNIC  OR  PALM  GARDENS  IN  CONNECTION. 


Police 
Precinct 

Number  of 
Licensed 
Saloons 

Saloons 
Reported 
Closed 

Partitions 
and  Rooms 
Used  as 
Store 
Rooms  and 
Kitchen 

Saloons 
Having 
Tables 
in  Bar 
Room 

Saloons 
Having 
Partitions, 
Wine 
Rooms  and 
Stalls 

Restaurants 
and  Cafes 
in  Con- 
nection 

Picnic 
or  Palm 
Gardens 
in  Con- 
nection 

1 

332 

2 

19 

47 

3 

2 

177 

12 

»,  • 

3 

168 

'i 

f  f 

27 

5 

4 

112 

3 

7 

64 

6 

5 

145 

4 

f  B 

56 

23 

1 

6 

184 

11 

3 

7 

118 

^  B 

5 

8 

m  9 

8 

82 

1 

'4 

16 

9 

^  m 

9 

21 

5 

4 

1 

10 

17 

*5 

6 

4 

2 

11 

75 

'i 

7 

2 

3 

12 

65 

i 

1 

7 

13 

69 

13 

1 

'i 

14 

143 

40 

m  . 

3 

15 

199 

'i 

ii 

25 

7 

5 

16 

95 

i 

90 

15 

5 

B  . 

17 

242 

'5 

106 

11 

2 

18 

34 

8 

1 

19 

219 

'4 

'i 

'i 

73 

's 

.  . 

20 

341 

5 

2 

58 

2 

1 

21 

277 

8 

7 

'4 

64 

27 

3 

22 

204 

18 

3 

23 

350 

'7 

'i 

14 

20 

2 

24 

108 

7 

55 

16 

25 

164 

1 

'i 

31 

23 

'2 

26 

133 

2 

75 

8 

27 

248 

'4 

'2 

49 

17 

28 

138 

85 

1 

29 

116 

73 

9 

'i 

30 

126 

'i 

'8 

76 

11 

1 

31 

32 

378 

'i 

54 

'i 

87 

16 

.  . 

33 

255 

3 

18 

16 

.  . 

34 

197 

'i 

9 

79 

7 

1 

35 

236 

3 

39 

67 

11 

36 

158 

'3 

132 

70 

13 

13 

37 

101 

i 

'9 

2 

38 

259 

2 

80 

16 

39 

177 

51 

21 

40 

130 

67 

19 

41 

183 

'2 

69 

19 

1 

42 

99 

'5 

51 

21 

3 

43 

103 

'2 

10 

8 

6 

44 

98 

66 

5 

5 

45 

4 

t  f 

3 

1 

1 

2 

Note  (1) 

14 

•• 

rotate 7094 51 136 286 1811 471 63 

NOTE:  (1)  Total  of  14  saloons  for  which  licenses  had  not  been  issued  or  which  were  out  of  business  at 
the  time  of  the  investigation  by  police  license  officers.  Licenses  for  these  were  issued  before  the 
expiration  of  license  period  ending  April  30,  1916. 


PI 


CC  C-l  M  ••*  O     •  CO  N  i-l  N 


;8  : 


<N  >O  -^  •«<  t^  1-1  W  N  CO 


CO      »-ieO      IM       •-! 


')'!O<o    •tti-tt~'4<x>vi'*i>O)inn 

t-l  1-1  i-l      •  f  W  !-"  IN  1-1  iH  P5         tHl-C 


cc 


HI-I    .    .1-1    .U5 


CC  -H  i-l  i-l  IH  i-i  -H 


<N  iN  TO  •-!  i-l  i-l  <ft  i-<  i-l  1-1 


•38 


o  a 


30 


1-1  US  U5  1~  CO 


"3  <u 

•*-•  o  a 


•o      a 


o 


io^tN.®?j'?«t~': 

*  M  M  U5       t»  FH  00  ,-.  00  <N  •<(•  •<»<  CO  -f  0  0  "6  US     • 


BJ"a 


'S^^N^NWNH 


31 


i-i  00 -<  t- to  t- 


1<  CO  00  •*  "5  •"»•  i-l 


^1    CS  CO  <N  0^1  <N  iH 


O  CO  CO  >O  C4  O  <-< 


"O  N  O  i-l  m 
1-H  i-H  IN  C*  i-l 


5O  IOO5  Cs  O!  CO 


•  t>  OS  t^  OS  >O  <N 


32 


TABLE  XVIII 

SUMMARY  DISTRIBUTION  OF  REVOCATIONS  OF  SALOON  LICENSES  DURING  THE 

PERIOD   BEGINNING    IMMEDIATELY   PRECEDING    THE    PASSAGE   OF   THE 

HARKIN  ORDINANCE,  (JUNE,  1906)  AND  UP  TO  JUNE,  1916.   (See  Note  1) 


Per  Cent  of          Per  Cent  of 

Number  of 

Per  Cent  of 

Number  of         B 

Revocations 

Saloon 

Police 

Licensed 

Saloons  in 

Saloon  License 

in 

Licenses 

Precinct 

Saloons 

Precinct 

Revocations 

Precinct 

Revoked 

1 

332 

4.7 

22 

3.3 

6.6 

2 

177 

2.5 

34 

5.1 

19.2 

3 

168 

2.4 

65 

9.7 

38.7 

4 

112 

1.6 

28 

4.2 

25.0 

5 

145 

2.0 

23 

3.5 

15.9 

6 

184 

2.6 

15 

2.2 

8.2 

7 

118 

1.7 

7 

1.1 

5.9 

8 

82 

1.2 

6 

0.9 

7.3 

9 

21 

0.3 

7 

1.1 

33.3 

10 

17 

0.2 

2 

0.3 

11.8 

11 

75 

1.1 

14 

2.1 

18.7 

12 

65 

0.9 

9 

1.4 

13.8 

13 

69 

1.0 

0.0 

14 

143 

2.0 

7 

i!6 

4.9 

15 

199 

2.8 

21 

3.1 

10.6 

16 

95 

1.3 

3 

0.4 

3.2 

17 

242 

3.4 

14 

2.1 

5.8 

18 

34 

0.5 

2 

0.3 

5.9 

19 

219 

3.1 

8 

1.2 

3.7 

20 

341 

4.8 

13 

1.9 

3.8 

21 

277 

3.9 

26 

3.9 

9.4 

22 

204 

2.9 

g 

1.4 

4.4 

23 

350 

5.0 

11 

1.6 

3.1 

24 

108 

1.5 

9 

1.3 

8.3 

25 

164 

2.3 

1 

0.1 

0.6 

26 

133 

1.9 

6 

0.9 

4.5 

27 

248 

3.5 

92 

13.7 

37.1 

28 

138 

2.0 

21 

3.1 

15.2 

29 

116 

1.6 

14 

2.1 

12.1 

30 

126 

1.8 

10 

1.5 

7.9 

31 

9 

• 

32 

378 

5.3 

20 

3.6 

S'.3 

33 

255 

3.6 

11 

1.6 

4.3 

34 

197 

2.8 

11 

1.6 

5.6 

35 

236 

3.3 

3 

0.4 

0.1 

36 

158 

2.3 

15 

2.2 

9.5 

37 

101 

1.4 

4 

0.6 

4.0 

38 

259 

3.7 

57 

8.5 

22.0 

39 

177 

2.5 

15 

2.2 

8.5 

40 

130 

1.8 

4 

0.6 

3.1 

41 

183 

2.6 

9 

1.4 

4.9 

42 

99 

1.4 

5 

0.7 

5.0 

43 

103 

1.5 

8 

1.2 

7.8 

44 

98 

1.4 

9 

1.4 

9.2 

45 

4 

0.1 

1 

0.1 

25.0 

Note  (2) 

14 

Totals 

7094 

671 

NOTES:     (1) 

All  but  46  of  the  671 

saloon  licenses  revoked  were  restored. 

List  of  names, 

locations  and 

dates  shown  in  Exhibit  "B." 

(2)  _   Total  of  14  saloons  for  which  licenses  had  not  been  issued  at  the  time  of  investigation  by 

police  license  officers,  or  which  were  temporarily  out  of  business. 


S3 


Exhibit  "A." 

Questionnaire  relating  to  the  distribution,  ownership, 
operation  and  physical  characteristics  of  saloons,  pre- 
pared by  the  Chicago  Commission  on  the  Liquor 
Problem. 

1.  Give  the  name  of  owner  of  each  saloon  doing  business  at  present  with 
address  and  police  precinct. 

2.  State  whether  the  saloon  is  controlled  by  a  brewery,  by  reason  of  the 
brewery  owning  license  to  such  saloon. 

3.  State  the  license  record  or  history  of  each  saloonkeeper,  that  is  if  such 
saloonkeeper  has   ever  been  in  trouble   or  reported   for  violating  the   law; 
whether  warnings  have  been  given  to  such  saloonkeeper  with  respect  to  vio- 
lations or  misconduct;  if  the  license  of  the  saloonkeeper  has  ever  been  revoked 
for  cause;  if  ever  convicted  and  fined  for  breaking  the  law;  and  other  informa- 
tion of  this  nature. 

4.  State  who  actually  operates  and  conducts  such  saloon,  that  is,  is  the 
man  who  actually  operates  and  conducts  the  saloon  the  real  owner  or  merely 
the  agent  or  employe  of  some  other  person  or  party  who  holds  or  owns  the 
license? 

5.  Give  the  name  of  person  appearing  on  the  city  license  for  each  saloon. 

6.  State  number  of  employes  of  each  saloon,  the  nature  of  the  occupation 
of  such  employes,  that  is,  whether  employed  as  bartender,  porter  and  the  like, 
and  give  name  and  address  of  each  employe. 

7.  State  whether  the  government  liquor  license  is  in  the  name  of  one  per- 
son or  corporation,  and  whether  the  city  liquor  license  is  in  the  name  of  another 
person  or  corporation. 

8.  State  whether  fixtures  in  saloon,  as  well  as  lease  to  the  premises,  are 
owned  by  the  holder  of  the  license,  or  by  the  person  actually  operating  the 
saloon,  or  by  the  brewery. 

9.  State  whether  partitions,  stalls,  private  winerooms  or  palm  and  picnic 
gardens  are  permitted  in  and  about  the  premises  of  the  saloon. 

10.  State  whether  dances  are  permitted  to  be  held  in  the  rear  rooms  of 
each  saloon  or  in  any  other  portion  of  the  building  in  which  such  saloon  is 
located. 

11.  State  whether  the  saloon  is  within  250  feet  of  a  public  or  private 
school,  church  or  any  public  institution. 

12.  State   whether  the   saloon   has    direct   connection   with    hotels,    bed 
rooms  or  other  private  rooms,  whether  in  the  rear,  side  of  the  saloon,  or  over- 
head. 

13.  State  whether  the  front,  side  and  rear  entrances  and  exits  to  the 
saloon  open  into  a  street,  alley,  yard  or  other  open  grounds,  or  otherwise. 

14.  State  whether  the  saloon  has  a  cabaret,  music  or  other  form  of  amuse- 
ment in  or  about  the  premises. 

15.  Give  other  facts  regarding  conditions  in  saloons  not  noted  above. 


34 


EXHIBIT  "B" 

LIST  OF  NAMES  OF  SALOONKEEPERS,  LOCATIONS  AND  DATES  OF  REVOCATIONS  AND 
RESTORATIONS  OF  SALOON  LICENSES  DURING  PERIOD  BEGINNING  IMMED- 
IATELY PRECEDING  THE  PASSAGE  OF  THE  HARKIN  ORDINANCE  (June, 
1906),  AND  UP  TO  JUNE,  1916. 

(As  obtained  from  books  and  records  in  the  office  of  the  Mayor  and  the  Chicago  Department  of  Police.) 


NAME 


Address  at 
Time  of  Revocation 


Present 

Police 

Precinct 


Date 
Revoked 


Restored 


Abrams,  Vic 738  W.  Madison  St 28  10/25/05  ll/  6/05 

Arado  Bros 1983  W.  Madison  St 30  12/28/05  Not 

Allman,  David 191  95th  St 16  10/14/07  Not 

Alesgunas,  Mike 3213  Auburn  Ave 6  6/14/10  12/3/10 

Alessie,  Angelo 265  Alexander  St 3  3/13/11  3/23/11 

Arkin,  Joe 811  Maxwell  St 21  1/17/12  1/20/12 

Adricci,  Joe 113  W.  21st  St 3  4/27/14  4/29/14 

Allisin,  Geo.  K 3501  S.  California  Ave. ,....'...  8  10/2/14  10/6/14 

Aristiger,  Williams 3035  State  Street '. 4  9/29/15  10/26/15 

Anaia,  N 547  So.  Fifth  Ave 2  3/16/16  3/31/16 

Ahern,  J.  Lawrence 4235  W.  Harrison  St 26  3/16/16  3/22/16 

Andriskienicz,  Ben 1758  Cortland  St 33  5/19/16  Not 

Abel,  Albert 1534  W.  51st  St 20  6/  2/16  6/20/16 

B 

Brown  &  Oliver 990  W.  Madison  St 29  7/  5/05  7/25/05 

Bush,  Clayton 1  and  3  N.  Clark  St 38  9/29/05  10/19/05 

Burke  &  Barry 444  S.  State  St 2  9/29/05  5/14/06 

Bloom,  Herman 196  E.  22nd  St.  .\ 3  2/9/06  Not 

Brizzalara  Bros 495  W.  Madison  St 28  2/9/06  2/19/06 

Burns,  William  E 218  N.  48th  St 30  3/23/06  Not 

Byrnes,  Geo 627  W.  Madison  St 28  7/  6/06  7/20/06 

Braun  &  Daniel 2308  Madison  St 26  12/13/10  12/24/10 

Baupbaum 2136  State  St 3  3/3/11  3/7/11 

Boiler,  Joseph 9216  Harbor  Ave 15  7/17/11  7/27/11 

Brown,  Archie 661  S.  State  St 2  10/18/11  10/31/11 

Berling,  Harry,  &  Sam  Kennedy. .   145  W.  39th  St 11  10/27/11  11/25/11 

Bruder,  Fred.  W 1112  W.  Madison  St 27  11/4/11  11/9/11 

Becker,  William  J 400  W.  Chicago  Ave 38  12/  5/11  12/15/11 

Beringer,  Eugene 38  S.  Halsted  St 27  4/  3/12  4/18/12 

Bradley,  James 618  W.  Madison  St 27  5/  3/12  5/14/12 

Berstein,  Joseph 216  S.  Halsted  St 27  9/25/12  10/11/12 

Behuke,  Frank 530  LaSalle  Ave 38  8/12/13  9/  5/13 

Bertucci,  Donnic 31  W.  18th  St 3  7/  3/13  9/15/13 

Berstein,  Louis 1725  State  St 3  7/  3/13  10/29/13 

Brinswski,  Frank 228  S.  Desplaines 27  10/16/13  10/28/13 

Berger,  Ike 1915  Archer  Ave 3  7/  3/13  10/29/13 

Behuke,  Frank 530  LaSalle  Ave 38  10/  1/13  ll/  7/13 

Buconeich,  Matt '.9178  Harbor  Ave 15  12/10/13  1/7/14 

Berman,  Geo.  L 6319  S.  Halsted  St 17  2/27/14  4/1/14 

Burns,  Alfred  F 55  W.  Austin  Ave 38  7/30/14  10/30/14 

Bell,  Harry 24  WT.  29th  St 4  8/29/14  10/  1/14 

Brouzarski,  Stanley 4537  S.  Hermitage  Ave 20  10/13/14  10/20/14 

Byrnes,  Geo.  W.  &  M.  J.  Kane  ....  1438  W.  Madison  St 28  2/20/15  3/  8/15 

Blais,  Joseph 900  W.  119th  St 9  4/19/15  4/22/15 

Boniakuski,  K 1416  Dickson  St 33  7/24/15  8/  7/15 

Barry,  Mitchell 1344  W.  Randolph  St 28  9/23/15  12/3/15 

Blumenfield.  David  H 6701  S.  LaSalle  St 6  12/18/15  12/23/15 

Bohan,  J.  W.,  and  Gertrude 335  E.  51st  St *  11  12/30/15  12/31/15 

Bimbeck,  Michael 1844  W.  Mobile  Ave 36  1  /10/16  2/16/16 

Busch.  Carl 153  N.  Dearborn  St 1  3/27/16  Not 

Brogin,  F.,  &  Delaurentis,  F 772  W.  Taylor  St 21  3/31/16  4/  8/16 

Barry,  Michael 1344  W.  Randolph  St 28  4/28/16  6/8/16 

Benedict,  Ben 3051  Archer  Ave 7  4/28/16  6/19/16 

Boyle,  John  J 5759  S.  State  St 11  5/15/16  5/18/16 

Burin,  E.  R..  &  Frank  J.  SeidI 4836  Broadway 41  5/19/16  5/29/16 

C 

Cahill,  Richard  J. . .                          . .   281  S.  Paulina  St 28  ll/  2/05  Not 

Campion,  F.  T 363  Sedgwick  St 38  12/1/05  Not 

Cella,  J.  &  A 445  W.  Madison  St 28  2/  9/06  2/19/06 

Carl,  Paul 188  E.  Randolph  St 1  11/8/06  11/22/06 

Carlmone,  W.  E 120  W.  51st  St 11  3/     /07  4/9/07 

Chodkowski,  H 533  107th  St 9  4/30/07  Not 

Cohen,  Harry 6318  Cottage  Grove  Ave 12  10/22/07  Not 

Cook.  Thos 1269  W.  Lake  St 29  I/  2/09  I/  9/09 

Cullen,  James 3696  Archer  Ave 8  7/8/09  10/30/09 

35 


EXHIBIT  "B"— Continued 


NAME 


Address  at 
Time  of  Revocation 


Present 

Police 

Precinct 


Date 
Revoked 


Restored 


Canavan,  Patrick 9390  Ewing  Ave 15  11/15/09          4/29/10 

Cohen,  M 24  S.  Canal  St 27  12/13/10  12/23/10 

Codozer,  A.  F 3030  State  St 4  1/7/11           1/21/11 

Chamales,  Jas 6331  N.  Clark  St 44  2/26/12           4/12/12 

Cantello,  Phillip 547  N.  Clark  St 38  3/13/12           4/24/12 

Cushner,  J.  V 1220  N.  Clark  St 39  3/30/12           5/8/12 

Cherin.  Dominic 1121  S.  Lincoln  St 24  5/28/12           6/17/12 

Carroll,  John 948  W.  Madison  St 27  7/15/12  10/29/12 

Cusick,  Harry 2035  Armour  Ave 3  8/23/12  10/29/12 

Curtis.  Harry '651  Madison  St 27  10/  5/12  10/15/12 

Clark,  C.  B 3022  Cottage  Grove.  Ave 4  10/17/12  10/18/12 

Cracker,  Geo 723  Milwaukee  Ave 32  10/21/12  10/23/12 

Conway,  Michael  (Murphy  Bros.)..  600  W.  26th  St 3  9/15/13  10/9/13 

Canany,  Patrick 923  Washington  Blvd 27  4/11/13          4/28/13 

Connor,  J.  M.  &  E.  J 145  S.  5th  Ave 1  5/9/13           5/16/13 

Curtis,  Harry 651  W.  Madison  St 27  3/15/13          4/30/13 

Canose.  Geo 53  W.  20th  St 3  7/  3/13  10/29/13 

Cassidy,  Thomas 1132  W.  Lake  St 27  6/10/14           7/25/14 

Czop&Sliz 1300  Cornell  St 32  6/27/14           7/7/14 

Campbell,  Raymond 2037  Wabash  Ave 3  7/28/14  10/30/14 

Caciappa,  S.  &  P.  Dionarto 1920  Wabash  Ave 3  10/20/14  10/20/14 

Colosimo,  James 2128  Wabash  Ave 3  8/24/14  11/4/14 

Conlon,  James 1537  Grand  Ave 32  10/2/14  10/14/14 

Collins,  John  P 670  W.  Madison  St 27  10/13/14  10/27/14 

Collins.  John  P 670  W.  Madison  St 27  1/30/15           2/11/15 

Cissell,  F.  W.  &  G.  McDowell 1716  Ogden  Ave 28  2/3/15           3/22/15 

Cohen,  Samuel 2136  Wabash  Ave 3  3/24/15             Not 

Czcerwiec,  Stanley 2258  W.  19th  St 23  4/23/15           55/1/1 

Collins,  John 135  S.  Halsted  St 27  7/  7/05           7/26/05 

Cazilimon  &  Carson 120  W.  51st  St 11  7/7/05           7/25/05 

Cody,  Thomas 3100  LaSalle  St 6  7/25/05           9/18/05 

Carson,  W.  R 120  W.  51st  St 11  9/     /05           9/13/05 

Corbett,  M 448  State  St 2  9/29/05  10/26/05 

Cohen,  Peter 219  W.  Randolph  St 1  9/29/05             Not 

Clautien,  Harry 1234  Wabash  Ave 2  10/11/05  11/10/05 

Collins,  John  P 670  W.  Madison  St 27  4/24/15           7/  2/15 

Connors,  Wm.  J 3160  Cottage  Grove  Ave 5  8/28/15           9/7/15 

Coniglis,  Mike 455  W.  Oak  St 38  10/6/15  10/22/15 

Csoutos,  Frank 334  E.  115th  St 14  10/25/15  11/29/15 

Cohen,  Harris,  &  Joe  Arkin. 811  Maxwell  St 21  12/  6/15  12/10/15 

Csoutos,  Frank 334  E.  115th  St 14  10/25/15  12/  7/15 

Ciszek,  Peter 4324  S.  Ashland  Ave 20  1/4/16          2/15/16 

Clark.  C.  B 3022  Cottage  Grove  Ave 4  3/21/16           3/24/16 

Comoso,  Antonio , .  1835  W.  VanBuren  St 28  5/1/16             Not 

D 

Dalpino  &  Schlassen 808  W.  Madison  St 27  6/2/10           7/27/10 

Davidson,  Sam 615  W.  Madison  St 27  12/13/10  12/23/10 

Danielson,  Jacob 3956  Lake  St 30  5/13/12           7/  3/12 

Dugdale,  Geo.  B 170  W.  Washington  St 1  11/30/12  12/31/12 

Duggan,  M.  C Ill  S.  Dearborn  St 1  4/28/13           5/22/13 

Decker,  Frank  P 4143  S.  Ashland  Ave 20  5/28/13           6/11/13 

Davis,  Ollie 2101  Dearborn  St 3  1/30/14           5/28/14 

Dineen,  John 559  S.  State  St 2  3/  6/14           5/21/14 

Doyle,  Thos.  M 4001  Montrose  Ave 36  10/  2/14  10/31/14 

Drangowski.  Chas 2510  S.  Western  Ave 23  1/8/15           1/18/15 

Dunde,  Joseph 2258  W.  19th  St 23  4/24/15           5/7/15 

Dalia,  Carlo 2218  Wentworth  Ave 3  8/28/15  11/23/15 

Dominicezo,  Pietro 317  E.  115th  St 14  10/20/15  12/28/15 

Dieck,  Richard 13400  Brandon  Ave 16  12/  6/15           1/19/16 

Dojutiek,  W 2501  N.  Lotus  Ave 37  3/9/16           3/13/16 

Dolatkoski.  Wm.  S 1260  W.  Madison  St 28  5/4/16           5/19/16 

Dal  Pino,  Caeser 808  W.  Madison  St 27  8/18/13           9/4/13 

E 

Esposeta.  Gusippe 120  Ewing  St 21  11/13/05  12/4/06 

Engle,  W 663  W.  19th  St 23  7/3/06             Not 

Eckholm,  Arthur 3132  W.  North  Ave 34  3/3/11           3/16/11 

Eaton,  J.  A 1624  Van  Buren  St 28  10/22/12  10/25/12 

Elser,  Oscar 2816  N.  Clark  St 41  9/5/13           9/15/13 

Epstein,  Abe 1000  W.  Madison  St 27  11/2/11  10/30/13 

Eluard,  Joseph 2200  N.  Western  Ave 34  3/28/14           3/31/14 

Eisenberg,  Simon 1100  Madison  St 27  6/19/15  10/29/15 

Egreshit*.  Matt 2159  Lewis  St 40  7/  9/15          8/  6/15 

36 


EXHIBIT  "B"— Continued 


Present 

Address  at 

Police 

Date 

NAME 

Time  of  Revocation 

Precinct 

Revoked 

Restored 

F 

Esigel,  Lee  &  Peter  Batcman 

.  .  .8854  Buffalo  Ave  

15 

8/28/15 

9/16/15 

Evans,  Meredith  , 

.  .  .   771  S.  State  St  

2 

2/19/16 

2/28/16 

Frieberg,  Frederick  K  

,  ..   182  E.  22nd  St  

3 

8/29/05 

Not 

Finely,  James  , 

,  .  .  450  S.  State  St  

2 

9/29/05 

ll/  6/05 

.  .  .  638  W.  Lake  St  

28 

4/11/06 

6/  6/06 

Frank,  Isaac  D  , 

.  .     50  Wells  St  

....       38 

I/  2/09 

5/  3/09 

Fenton,  Edward  , 

.  .2744  Wentworth  Ave  

3 

3/  3/11 

3/11/11 

.  .  1032  Randolph  St  

27 

3/  3/11 

3/  9/11 

Frey,  Joseph  , 

.  ..  616  N.  Clark  St  

38 

3/30/12 

4/11/12 

Franks,  Harry  

,  .  .   549  Wells  St  

38 

10/  7/12 

10/31/12 

Farrell,  Arthur  , 

,..     39  So.  Peoria  St  

27 

10/18/13 

I/  5/14 

Fitzgerald  &  Monahan  , 

.  .     69  W.  Monroe  St  

1 

12/13/13 

12/18/13 

Friedman,  Joe  , 

,  .  .2222  Wabash  Ave  

4 

7/  3/13 

10/29/13 

Farias,  Joseph  

.  .  .  1805  State  St  

3 

7/  3/13 

8/  1/13 

Feinberg,  Morris  

...1621  Wabash  Ave  

3 

7/  3/13 

8/21/13 

Friedman,  Louis  , 

.  .  .   833  W.  Madison  St  

27 

7/  9/13 

7/22/13 

Foley,  Dennis  P  , 

...3036  State  St  

4 

8/  1/13 

8/20/13 

Farrell,  Phillip  

.  .  .1022  W.  Madison  St  

27 

5/28/14 

6/  3/14 

Freed,  Chas  , 

,  .  .2128  W.  Madison  St  

29 

4/19/15 

7/  1/15 

Falyczyk,  Michael  

.  .11801  Morgan  St  

9 

6/15/15 

9/10/15 

Flinta,  Nicholas  , 

.  ..  934  W.  119th  St  

9 

6/15/15 

6/22/15 

Fiedler,  Karl  , 

,  .  .  823  W.  Monroe  St  

27 

6/21/15 

10/28/15 

Fionda,  Joseph  , 

.  .  .  1050  W.  VanBuren  St  , 

27 

9/24/15 

Not 

Feinstein,  Phil  

.  .1858  W.  Lake  St  

28 

1/17/16 

2/19/16 

Fischer,  Ernest  , 

,  .  .3758  N.  Albany  Ave  

....       36 

2/23/16 

3/30/16 

Funk,  Fred  A  

.  .2000  N.  California  Ave  

35 

2/25/16 

2/28/16 

Friedman,  Ben  

.  .  424  So.  Clark  St  

2 

3/  9/16 

3/11/16 

Feinberg,  Morris  

.  .  1621  Wabash  Ave  

3 

7/30/13 

4/12/16 

Fulton,  Fred  

.  .  448  N.  Clark  St  

38 

6/  1/16 

Not 

G 

Greeby,  John  

.  .   103  W.  26th  St  

23 

7/14/05 

7/25/05 

Gallagher,  Peter  F  

..5057  State  St  

11 

10/19/05 

Not 

Guthrel,  Christian  

.  .  206  W.  Adams  St  

....       27 

12/  1/05 

12/11/05 

Gilliam,  W  

.  .  212  E.  35th  St  

5 

2/27/06 

3/10/06 

Germser,  Emil  

.  .     54  Wells  St  

....       38 

10/10/06 

Not 

Griesbush,  .Fritz  

.  .5014  Cottage  Grove  Ave  

....       11 

4/  4/07 

Not 

.  .  437  S.  State  St  

2 

3/14/10 

4/29/10 

Causer,  S.  D  

.  .  734  Root  St  

19 

5/20/10 

6/27/10 

.  .  1607  Wabash  Ave  

3 

ll/  1/10 

11/28/10 

Gaffney,  John  J  

.  .   114  E.  31st  St  

4 

11/22/10 

12/20/10 

Greenspan,  M  

.  .4752  W.  Chicago  Ave  

....       30 

12/  9/10 

Not 

Girs,  Max  

.  .3829  Morgan  St  

6 

3/  3/11 

3/  9/11 

German,  Theodor  

.  .1524  W.  17th  St  

22 

8/  5/12 

8/12/12 

Goldman,  Wm.  &  Julius  Ash.  .  .  . 

.  .  606  W.  Madison  St  

27 

8/  8/12 

9/  5/12 

Goldberg  Bros  

.  .   500  N.  Clark  St  

....       38 

10/  7/12 

10/14/12 

Gozden,  Nick  

.  .   653  Madison  St  

27 

10/18/13 

12/  3/13 

Grabiner,  Joe  

.  .2106  Dearborn  St  

3 

I/  7/14 

1/30/14 

Gill,  Fred,  Harry  Martin,  Mgr.  .  . 

.  .2000  Ogden  Ave  

24 

2/10/13 

4/18/13 

Gill,  William  

.  .  1955  Harrison  St  

24 

2/10/13 

4/18/13 

Gill,  William  &  Walter  

.  .  1955  Harrison  St  

24 

2/14/13 

4/22/13 

Goldberg,  Ben  

.  .  676  Madison  St  

27 

2/14/13 

2/15/13 

Goldbaum,  Harry  

.  .1033  S.  State  St  

2 

3/31/13 

4/30/13 

Gall,  John  

.  .  963  Milwaukee  Ave  

....       32 

4/28/13 

4/30/13 

..2842  State  St  ;... 

4 

7/15/13 

7/28/13 

Gorda,  Roccos  

.  .  1645  Wabansia  Ave  

33 

7/28/13 

12/12/13 

Gagne,  Geo  

.  .  651  Madison  St  

....       27 

12/12/13 

12/22/13 

Guerin,  Timothy  B  

.  .4825  S.  Halsted  St  

....       19 

3/11/14 

3/12/14 

Green,  Jack  

..6337  N.  Clark  St  

44 

6/22/14 

6/26/14 

Gorda,  Rocco  

.  .  1645  Wabansia  Ave  

....       33 

6/28/14 

7/25/14 

Giannola,  D  

.  .  649  S.  Clark  St  

2 

11/20/14 

12/  8/14 

Grogan,  B.  J  

.  .  1160  W.  VanBuren  St  

....       27 

2/20/15 

11/27/15 

Gasrilovicz,  J.  &  Waniekowski.  .  , 

...  225  E.  115th  St  

14 

2/26/15 

3/18/15 

Galvin,  Christopher  J  

.  .  10660  Vincennes  Ave  

9 

6/15/15 

6/24/15 

Girindo,  Nick  

.  .  1939  Archer  Ave  

3 

6/30/15 

ll/  2/15 

Greniewich,  S.  &  Zakezewski.  .  .  . 

.  .  12105  S.  Halsted  St  

....       14 

7/15/15 

9/20/15 

Globes,  Peter  

.  .3428  Auburn  Ave  

6 

12/17/15 

12/30/15 

Golden,  Louis  

.  .6319S.  Halsted  St  

17 

12/30/15 

1/12/16 

Gavilowicz,  Joseph  

..  225  E.  115th  St  

14 

I/  5/16 

1/18/16 

Groth,  Henry  J  

.  .  415  E.  63rd  St  

12 

2/18/16 

4/20/16 

Goldberg,  Jacob  

.  .4157  N.  Central  Park  Ave.  . 

....       36 

3/  2/16 

3/  8/16 

.  .3324  N.  Halsted  St  

42 

3/16/16 

3/23/16 

Geocaris,  Alex  

.  .3310  Milwaukee  Ave  

....       36 

3/14/16 

3/23/16 

Gillride,  Michael  

.4132  Wentworth  Ave  

....       19 

3/23/16 

3/25/16 

37 


EXHIBIT  "B"— Continued 


NAME 


Address  at 
Time  of  Revocation 


Present 

Police 

Precinct 


Date 
Revoked 


Restored 


H 

Heubner.  John....      634  N.  Halsted  St 39  6/7/05 

Hunkler.  Mrs.  Anna 630  N.  Halsted  St 39  6/  7/05 

Hart,  Curtis 2634  So.  State  St 4  5/29/05 

Hagart,  William 267  Colorado  Ave 29  6/26/05 

Heubner,  John 634  N.  Clark  St 39 

Hanley,  Thos 103  E.  Harrison  St 2  11/14/05 

Heffeo'n,  Thos 1  and  3  N.  Clark  St 38  2/  9/06 

Hcidbrink,  Geo 177  N.  Clark  St 38  2/  9/06 

Herman,  Max 220  W.  Randolph  St 27  2/  9/06 

Herron,  Willis 3410  Cottage  Grove  Ave 5  2/15/06 

Harrington,  Jos 9210  Harbor  Ave 15  6/25/06 

Haskins,  Hugh 3161  S.  State  St 5  3/16/09 

Hageman,  Aug 3940  W.  Madison  St 30  12/11/09 

Harold,  John 69  E.  Monroe  St 1  2/  5/10 

Heuer,  John  F.,  Pocieus  Bros.,  Mgrs.4559  S.  Ashland  Ave 20  1/20/10 

Hoge,  Edward 3635  Montrose  Ave 36  3/3/11 

Helot,  Wm 2701  Clybourne  Ave 41  3/6/11 

M.  Spiral,  Mgr. 

Howard  &  Monahan 120  S.  Halsted  St 27  5/13/12 

Hinckley,  Geo.  W 859  W.  63rd  St 17  7/  1/12 

Halyko,'  Michael 4959  S.  Hoyne  Ave 20  9/26/12 

Harris,  J.  W 20  N.  Curtis  St 27  9/26/12 

Hayes,  Michael  J 822  W.  Adams  St 27  I/  6/13 

Halliday,  W 1804  Wabash  Ave 3  7/  3/13 

Harris,  A.  E 1610  Wabash  Ave 3  7/  3/13 

Helegda,  Maria 4350  S.  Ashland  Ave 20  10/21/13 

Hejna,  Carl 3401  W.  38th  St 8  4/27/14 

Harris,  R.  P 112  N.  Halsted  St 27  8/24/14 

Hancock,  Geo 448  N.  Clark  St 38  8/24/14 

Halzko,  Michael 4959  S.  Hoyne  Ave 20  9/26/12 

Han,  Fred  J 1801  W.  Madison  St 28  12/30/14 

Henn,  Helen  D 4201  Emerald  Ave 19  3/12/14 

Heaphy,  Patrick 512  W.  Chicago  Ave 32  4/26/15 

Hoffman  &  Keefer 929  S.  State  St 2  12/  6/15 

Handelman,  David 3900  Federal  St 11  12/18/15 

Harrison,  G.,  &  Anderson,  G 6311  N.  Clark  St 44  1/10/16 

Hollinger,  Jacob  G 3601  Southport  Ave 42  2/23/16 

Hoskins,  Hugh 3161  State  St 5  3/16/16 

Hoskin,  Hugh 3121  State  St 5  3/20/16 

Heidrich,  A 1125  Rush  St 38  3/25/16 

I 

Her,  D.  W 18  So.  Clark  St. ...  1  6/13/05 

lanni,  Ortenzio 925  Blue  Island  Ave 21  10/  2/14 

J 

Jones,  W.  M. . .                                 . .  1626  Dearborn  St 3  6/17/05 

Jones  &  Nelson 567  State  St 2               

Jones,  Wm 1626  Dearborn  St 3  7/25/05 

Jaska,  Gusta 225  W.  Randolph  St 27  10/  3/05 

Johnson,  D.  H 158  E.  18th  St 3  11/10/05 

Johnson,  Julius 180  W.  Lake  St 27  3/12/06 

Jackson  Park  Catering  Co 5554  Lake  Ave 10  4/11/06 

Jackson  Catering  Co 5556  Lake  Ave 10  4/12/06 

Dougherty,  Sec. 

Jagla,  Frank 1060  Diversey  Blvd 41  9/22/06 

Jagla,  Frank 1060  Diversey  Blvd 41  10/16/06 

Johnson,  Geo 3033  Cottage  Grove  Ave 4  I/  7/11 

Johnson,  Godfrey 443  N.  Clark  St 38  7/27/11 

Jennings,  Thos 814  W.  Monroe  St 27  5/13/12 

Jennings,  Thos 814  W.  Monroe  St 27  9/26/12 

Johansen,  Ole 2557  W.  North  Ave 34  3/11/14 

Jordon.  John 2008  Wabash  Ave 3  7/30/14 

Joyce,  Coleman 701  Wells  St 38  10/16/14 

Johnson,  John  J 922  W.  Monroe  St 27  9/  8/15 

Johnson,  Alfred 5401  N.  Clark  St 44         •      11/30/15 

Jacobs,  Louis  H 3922  Lincoln  Ave 43  1  /29/16 

Janni,  John 2258  N.  Clark  St 40  3/16/16 

Jacobson,  Eli 531  W.  Madison  St 27  I/  5/16 

Jacobson,  Gust.  E 3260  N.  Clark  St 42  1/27/16 

38 


6/13/05 

Not 

6/22/05 

7/  5/05 

10/  4/05 

11/21/05 

Not 

2/19/06 
5/  4/06 

Not 

7/26/06 

10/13/09 

12/16/09 

3/29/10 

2/  9/11 

3/  9/11 

3/  9/11 

6/17/12 

7/17/12 

10/31/12 

10/31/12 

1/13/13 

8/19/13 

9/15/13 

10/24/13 

5/19/14 

8/27/14 

9/  3/14 

12/  3/14 

4/15/15 

4/21/15 

6/24/15 

12/11/15 

12/24/15 

2/25/16 

3/  7/16 

4/28/16 

3/23/16 

4/  5/16 


7/  7/05 
10/21/14 


7/  5/05 

6/20/05 

9/13/05 

10/20/05 

Not 

3/27/06 
4/14/06 
4/14/06 

10/10/06 

10/16/06 

1/21/11 

10/24/11 

6/17/12 

10/17/12 

3/20/14 

10/23/14 

ll/  6/14 

10/  2/15 

12/10/15 

2/  2/16 

3/24/16 

1/10/16 

3/10/16 


EXHIBIT  "B"— Continued 


NAME 


Address  at 
Time  of  Revocation 


Present 

Police 

Precinct 


Date 
Revoked 


Restored 


K 

Kruegcr,  Rose 77  N.  Clark  St ...  38  8/10/05  9/6/05 

Kaprako  &  Chamales 436  S.  State  St 2  7/15/05  8/21/05 

Kavanaugh,  D.  &  Son 136  E.  Van  Buren  St 2  10/30/05  11/4/05 

Koening,  Mrs.  Mary 3043  Evanston  Ave 44  2/16/06             Not 

Kendzeora,  Cecillia 659  N.  Ashland  Ave 33  3/  5/06  5/  1/06 

Kendzeora,  Frank 659  N.  Ashland  Ave 33  3/  7/06  5/  1/06 

Kane,  Frank  J 1300  Wabash  Ave 2  10/14/07  I/  3/08 

Kordydek,  James 527  S.  Canal  St 21  12/26/07  4/29/08 

Klotter,  David 346  E.  35th  St 5  3/11/11  6/23/11 

Korowelas,  Gust 534  W.  81st  St 18  12/5/11  12/13/11 

Kassen,  John 901  W.  Randolph  St 27  2/  9/12  4/24/12 

Katz,  Herman 39  S.  Peoria  St 27  3/19/12  4/25/12 

Kaucelbaum,  Benj 26  N.  5th  Ave 1  8/  5/12  9/26/12 

Kalomiris,  Nick 6556  State  St 17  6/10/13  7/  9/13 

Kaufer,  Michael 535  Wells  St 38  9/  3/12  10/31/12 

Kath,  Herman,  &  Aug.  Krueger  ...   140  W.  Ontario  St 38  4/15/13  7/  3/13 

Kabialis,    Peter,    &    Win.    J. 

Sabakanskas 8139  Vincennes  Road 18  4/23/13  4/30/13 

Krakora,  John 1323  W.  18th  St 22  10/22/13  10/30/13 

Klute,  Edward 736  E.  39th  St 5  2/11/14  2/19/14 

Kauzera,  Toney 1322  Wrightwood  Ave 41  2/27/14  3/3/14 

Karen,  Phillip 38  S.  Halsted  St 27  3/  5/14  3/12/14 

Kuezkiewicz,  Ignatz 11857  Michigan  Ave 14  3/28/14  3/31/14 

Kobla,  Adam 1834  W.  39th  St 7  4/30/14  5/18/14 

Krakan  Bros 1500  W.  12th  st 21  5/  8/14  5/20/14 

Katz,  Joseph 625  W.  Madison  St 27  7/14/14  10/  7/14 

Kulwinsky,  Joseph 671  W.  12th  St 21  10/  2/14  10/21/14 

Kirwan,  Jno 921  W.  Harrison  St 21  10/  8/14  10/30/14 

Kasimir,  Kudulis 1942  Canalport  Ave 22  10/22/14  10/27/14 

Kath,  Herman  &  Krueger,  Aug.. . .   140  W.  Ontario  St 38  4/15/13  10/29/14 

Krakow  Bros 1500  W.  12th  St 21  5/8/14  11/30/14 

Kerwin,  Thomas 40  N.  Clinton  St 27  12/  7/14  3/  5/15 

Kerwin,  Thomas 21  N.  Dearborn  St 1  12/  7/14  1/15/15 

Kacki,  Stanley 1525  W.  North  Ave 33  12/28/14  12/29/14 

Kendziora,  Frank 1203  Milwaukee  Ave 33  4/19/15  4/20/15 

Kane  &  Byrnes 1438  W.  Madison  St 28  9/29/15  10/20/15 

Kalms,  Wm 3200  Lincoln  Ave 43  12/22/15  12/27/15 

Kennedy,  M 610  W.  37th  St 6  1/12/16  1/18/16 

Kane,  R.  L 814  W.  71st  St 17  1/15/16  1/29/16 

Kramer,  Chas 2259  W.  12th  St 24  I/  3/16  5/17/16 

Kenney,  Michael 3749  S.  Halsted  St 6  1/10/16  2/23/16 

Kurpiewski,  Jos 2201  N.  Lathrope  St 37  2/16/16  2/23/16 

Kurbaeck,  Aug.  F 3501  N.  Robey  St.  ^ 43  3/  2/16  3/  8/16 

Kupstis,  Wm 901  W.  14th  St 21  3/18/16  5/  8/16 

Kennedy,  David 1101  Washington  Blvd 27  4/28/16  6/  2/16 

Karthauser,  Nick 6636  Ridge  Ave 45  5/22/16  5/29/16 

L 

Lonergan,  James 3119  Cottage  Grove 5  2/9/06  5/14/06 

Lagorio,  A 299  W.  Madison  St 27  2/  9/06  2/19/06 

Laport,  Albert 2889  Archer  Ave 7  9/4/06  10/31/06 

Leine,  E.  J.,  Bros 256  E.  22nd  St 3  10/  8/06  10/23/06 

Levin,  Frank 2961  Madison  St 29  12/13/10  12/20/10 

Loftus,  William  L 3022  Cottage  Grove  Ave 4  2/10/11  3/14/11 

Lawrence,  Cyrus 3924  W.  North  Ave 34  3/3/11  3/13/11 

Lynch,  Hugh 3457  S.  Ashland  Ave 7  3/23/11  3/31/11 

Lipsey.  David 74  W.  Van  Buren  St 1  1/15/12  1/24/12 

Lipsey,  David 737  S.  State  St 2  1/18/12  1/25/12 

Lazarus,  J 2107  S.  State  St 3  2/18/12  6/13/12 

Lazarski,  Ignatz,  John  Hogan,  Mgr.  2789  E.  83rd  St 15  5/29/12  7/  9/12 

Levicki,  Adam 4600  Wentworth  Ave 19  8/  5/12  9/25/12 

Leon,  Ben 600  N.  Sangamon 32  8/  6/12  9/  5/12 

Lombardo  &  Damello 6331  N.  Clark  St 44  9/26/12  10/25/12 

Leucker,  Matt 3334  N.  Clark  St 42  1/31/13  2/28/13 

Long,  Robert 102  St.  and  Vincennes  Rd 9  2/15/13  4/23/13 

Lynch,  W.  W 501  N.  Dearborn  Ave 38  10/30/13  ll/  5/13 

Lazansky,  Eman 2100  Allport  St 22  1/15/14  2/11/14 

Lesser,  Chas.  G 1498  Clybourn  Ave 39  4/18/13  4/22/13 

Lippert,  Adolph  S 500  S.  Halsted  St 27  5/  9/13  5/13/13 

Lay,  Nichols 1535  Fullerton  Ave 40  6/23/13  7/  2/13 

Leather,  James 2101  State  St 3  7/3/13  10/21/13 

Lipsky,  Isador 17  E.  31st  St 5  3/18/14  3/27/14 

Long,  John 4522  State  St 11  6/15/14  6/26/14 

Lee,  Herbert 4836  Broadway 44  8/24/14  9/4/14 

Lesser,  Chas 1498  Clybourn  Ave 39  10/2/14  10/5/14 

Lather.  William 20  W.  22nd  St 4  10/2/14  10/31/14 

39 


EXHIBIT  "B"— Continued 


Present 

Address  at 

Police 

Date 

NAME 

Time  of  Revocation 

Precinct 

Revoked 

Restored 

L 

Lynch,  Harold  E  

.  .   114  E.  35th  St  

5 

3/  2/15 

3/30/15 

Lesser,  Chas  

.  .  1498  Clybourn  Ave  

...       39 

8/28/15 

9/  7/15 

..6801  S.  WoodSt  

...       17 

10/27/15 

ll/  5/15 

Labbie,  F.  B  

.  .   144  S.  Wabash  Ave  

1 

12/18/15 

12/23/15 

Lamkin,  O.  M  

.  .3306  Cottage  Grove  Ave  

5 

12/30/15 

12/31/15 

Lenderr,  Chas  

.  .  1704  Fullerton  Ave  

41 

12/30/15 

1/17/16 

Levin,  Isadore  .•  

.  .3501  State  St  

5 

3/16/16 

3/16/16 

Lunberg,  C  

.  .     17  W.  Division  St  

...       38 

5/  5/16 

5/18/16 

Lanter,  Samuel  

.  .2727  State  St  

4 

6/  6/16 

Not 

M 

Meyers,  J.  S  

.  .     49  E.  Van  Buren  St  

1 

6/13/05 

6/20/05 

Morris  &  Elpin  

.  .  274  E.  Madison  St  

1 

6/17/05 

6/20/05 

Mathews,  Anna  

.  .   280  W.  Lake  St  

...       27 

7/25/05 

8/17/05 

McGraw  &  Staples  

.  .   507  Lincoln  Ave  

...       41 

7/25/05 

8/18/05 

McGuire,  M.  S  

.  .  1213  Wabash  Ave  

2 

9/13/05 

JO/19/05 

Marks,  Elis  

.  .  217  W.  Randolph  St  

...       27 

9/29/05 

Not 

..     57  N.  Clark  St  

...       38 

9/29/05 

10/13/05 

Morre,  Pony  

.  .   171  E.  21st  St  

3 

11/10/05 

12/  5/05 

Mulkey,  J.  O  

.  .2036  Carroll  Ave  

...       30 

1/16/06 

Not 

Meehan,  Geo  

.  .  207  Austin  Ave  

...       32 

2/  5/06 

3/28/07 

Murphy,  John  C  

..  447  N.  Clark  St  

39 

2/  9/06 

2/19/06 

..  234  E.  22nd  St  

3 

2/  9/06 

Not 

Miller,  Kent  

..  224  E.  22nd  St  

3 

10/  8/06 

10/11/06 

Miller,  R.  H  

.  .     56  Wells  St  

.  .  .  .       38 

I/  2/09 

Not 

Mikkelson,  Leon  

.  .  1546  Milwaukee  Ave  

34 

7/21/09 

10/  5/09 

Murphy,  Edward  

..     93  E.  Kinzie  St  

.  .  .  .       38 

9/  1/09 

10/26/09 

McGee,  Eugene  

.  .  1956  N.  Francisco  Ave  

.  .  .  .       36 

1/29/10 

5/12/10 

.  .  1021  W.  Lake  St  

.  .  .  .       29 

3/14/10 

5/16/10 

Mullen,  James  H  

.  .4017  S.  Ashland  Ave  

.  .  .  .       20 

10/  3/10 

11/18/10 

Malinovetch,  Jac  

..1258  W.  14th  St  

.  .  .  .       21 

3/  3/11 

3/  7/11 

Mischkem,  John  A.  Paicz,  Mgr.  . 

.  .2635  Clybourne  Ave  

41 

3/  6/11 

3/15/11 

Miller,  Sam  

..   601  Wells  St  

38 

3/30/11 

4/29/11 

Moyinham,  J.  &  Galvin,  J  

..     10  S.  Paulina  St  

.  .  .  .       28 

10/11/11 

10/31/11 

Messinger,  Peter  

11  S.  Sangamon  St  

27 

2/29/12 

4/24/12 

Marcus,  Leo  V  

.  .  823  W.  Monroe  St  

.  .  .  .       27 

5/15/12 

5/31/12 

Miller,  H.  A.,  E.  Kent,  Mgr  

..  1200  W.  69th  St  

17 

7/17/12 

8/  8/12 

Marks,  Ben  

.  .  657  S.  State  St  

2 

9/25/12 

10/  4/12 

Miller,  Edgar  S  

.  .1734  Van  Buren  St  

.  .  .  .       28 

10/21/12 

10/31/12 

Mindla,  James  

.  .2159  W.  Harrison  St  

.  .  .  .       24 

4/11/13 

4/30/13 

Meyers,  Joseph  A  

.  .2107  Wabash  Ave  

3 

4/12/13 

4/30/13 

Morrison,  J.  A  

..     30  W.  Harrison  St  

2 

5/19/13 

5/26/13 

McGoven,  John  

..  432  N.  Clark  St  

....       38 

6/23/13 

11/18/13 

Markowitz,  A  

.  .  1936  Archer  Ave  

3 

7/  3/13 

10/23/13 

McNultv,  Michael  

.  .2161  Ogden  Ave  

....       24 

8/  8/13 

10/  3/13 

MoLaughlin,  A  

.  .6300  S.  Halsted  St  

17 

8/  8/13 

8/14/13 

McHenrv,  E.  L  , 

.  .  417  S.  Wabash  Ave  

2 

ll/  4/13 

5/  6/14 

Meyer,  Henry  

.  .  1001  S.  Racine  Ave  

21 

12/16/13 

12/26/13 

Mackay,  James  , 

.  .  .2410  Milwaukee  Ave  

...:       34 

4/27/14 

5/  8/14 

Messinger,  Peter  , 

.  .  .     11  S.  Sangamon  St  

....       27 

2/28/12 

6/23/14 

Milanowski,  Julian  

.  .  .3430  S.  Halsted  St  

6 

7/  9/14 

7/31/14 

McHenry,  E.  L  

.  .  .  417  Wabash  Ave  

2 

ll/  4/13 

7/14/14 

McGoven,  Wm.  and  John  

.  ..  659  N.  Clark  St  

....       38 

7/30/14 

10/16/14 

McDermott,  Robert  

...15008.  State  St  

2 

8/24/14 

10/30/14 

Messinger,  Peter  

.  .  .  1050  W.  Van  Buren  St  

27 

10/10/14 

1/22/15 

McGowan,  David  

...  3022  State  St  

4 

10/16/14 

10/21/14 

Messenger,  Peter  

.  .  .  1050  W.  Van  Buren  St  

....       27 

10/10/14 

7/  1/15 

Mendelsen,  Emanuel  

.  ..     17  E.  31st  St  

5 

12/22/14 

1/30/15 

Miller,  Tony  

.  .  .  1925  W.  Madison  St  

....       28 

2/20/15 

4/21/15 

Marciniok,  Jos  

.  ..  919  W.  31st  St  

6 

4/  1/15 

4/21/15 

McCallum,  J.  A  

.  .  .  316  E.  31st  St  

4 

9/11/15 

90/51/55 

McGowan,  David  

...  3022  State  St  

4 

9/15/15 

1/26/12 

Milco,  Nick  B  

.  .  .  653  Madison  St  

27 

11/13/15 

2/26/16 

Milewski,  Joseph  

.  .  .4547  S.  Hermitage  Ave  

....       20 

12/  3/15 

12/20/15 

Murthaugh,  Matthew  

.  ..   512  W.  43rd  St  

....       19 

12/  6/15 

12/10/15 

Miller,  Fritz  

.  .  .  1303  Mohawk  St  

....       39 

12/18/15 

12/22/15 

McHale,  Martin  &  Patrick  

.  .  .  422  Rush  St  

38 

12/24/15 

I/  3/16 

Maini,  Luigi  

.  .  .   731  S.  Clark  St  

2 

12/27/15 

1/11/16 

Murphy,  John  

.  .  .   624  W.  37th  St  

6 

1/12/16 

1/18/16 

Murczmski.  Wm  

.  .  .2947  Farrell  St  

7 

1/12/16 

1/20/16 

Marchuk,  Phillip  

.  .  .1154  Chicago  Ave  

....       32 

1/13/16 

1/21/16 

McGuire,  Joe  

.  .  .  3033  Cottage  Grove  Ave  .  . 

4 

2/23/16 

3/1  /16 

.  .  .   304  W.  Van  Buren  St  

1 

2/25/16 

3/21/16 

Marzyuski,  James  

.  .  .3634  Belmont  Ave  

36 

3/  1/16 

3/  7/16 

Mueller,  H.  F  

.  .  .3451  Indiana  Ave  

5 

3/  6/16 

5/20/16 

Meinke,  Mary  

...2325W.  North  Ave  

34 

3/27/16 

3/29/16 

Martin  &  Patrick  Tenson  

.  .  .  806  Rush  St.  .  .  :  

....       38 

3/28/16 

4/1/16 

McDonough,  John  

.  .  .1030  N.  Franklin  St  

....       38 

3/28/16 

4/19/16 

Meicbi.JPaul  

...2401  W.  Lake  St  

29 

4/  5/16 

Not 

40 


EXHIBIT  "B" — Continued 


NAME 


Address  at 
Time  of  Revocation 


Present 

Police 

Precinct 


Date 
Revoked 


Restored 


N 


Nudloff,  Albert 375  S.  Port  Ave 

Nicholas  Bros 59  N.  Clark  St 

Novashelski,  J 59  N.  Clark  St 

Nathan,  Jos 331  W.  Madison  St 

Nolan,  John 3600  Fillmore  St 

Nicolassi,  Jas.  &  C 1000  Gault  St 

Nesr,  John 1019  S.  Halsted  St 

Nordncci,  Sam 1608  State  St 

Neybert,  Geo 3417  E.  89th  St 

Nanseda,  Wm 1645  Wabansia  Ave , 

Norton,  James  T 244  W.  32nd  St 

Nelson,  Herman 8743  Buffalo  Ave , 

Nivotny,  Chas 3300  W.  23rd  St , 

Nelson,  Abe 2001  W.  Chicago  Ave , 

Navancich,  Wasa 8922  The  Strand 


41 
38 
38 
27 
26 
38 
21 

3 
15 
33 

6 
15 
25 
32 
15 


6/17/05 
7/10/05 
2/  9/06 
2/  9/06 
2/  1/11 
8/24/11 
5/26/13 
7/  3/13 
4/20/14 
6/29/14 
7/24/15 
8/28/15 
3/16/16 
4/14/16 
5/18/16 


6/28/05 
8/10/05 

Not 

2/21/06 
2/10/11 
10/27/11 
5/29/13 
8/  1/13 
6/10/14 
3/  2/15 
8/31/15 
9/  8/15 
3/18/16 
4/18/16 

Not 


O'Connor,  Michael  J 2701  Division  St 34  4/15/13  4/22/13 

Olowsky,  John 644  W.  18th  St 22  1/12/14  2/11/14 

O'Brien,  Chas.  E 77  N.  Clark  St 38  2/5/06  Not 

O'Donnell,  Wm.  F 1  and  3  N.  Clark  St 38  12/21/05  Not 

O'Henry,  James 4185  S.  Halsted  St 19  7/16/06  10/31/06 

O'Hara,  P.  J 6307  S.  Halsted  St 17  9/  6/06  Not 

O'Keefe,  M.  J 735  Milwaukee  Ave 33  6/30/08  11/30/08 

Otto,  George 9022  The  Strand 15  7/17/11  7/21/11 

Olson,  Frank  L 459  E.  31st  St 5  10/11/11  10/26/11 

O'Donnell,  Jos 520  Dearborn  St 2  3/16/12  4/30/12 

Onofriello,  Giovino 9156  Harbor  Ave 15  7/15/12  10/25/12 

O'Connell,  J.  F 164  E.  Michigan  St 38  2/5/13  2/11/13 

O'Brien,  Dennis  J 1154  W.  Randolph  St 27  8/24/14  10/7/14 

Ozello,  James 14  W.  Harrison  St 2  10/9/14  11/19/14 

O'Donnell,  P.  J 768  W.  Van  Buren  St 27  2/20/15  3/  3/15 

O'Brien,  Dennis  J 1154  W.  Randolph  St 27  4/26/15  5/26/16 

Opolinski,  Stanley,  &  Frank  Parzysz  1555  W.  Division  St 33  7/20/15  7/30/15 

O 

O'Connor,  Wm.  J. .                        . .  .3160  Cottage  Grove  Ave 5  8/28/15 

O'Connor,  Wm 800  W.  Lake  St 27  9/23/15 

O'Boyle,  John 901  Orleans  St 38  12/  6/15 

O'Toole,  Wm 1345  W.  Lake  St 28  2/23/16 

Olsziwski,  Steve 1637  W.  35th  St 7  3/25/16 

P 

Puzzo,  Frank.  . .                                 .   104  E.  Polk  St.  . .  2  7/  7/05  7/25/05 

Potthast,  Fred 63  E.  Van  Buren  St 1  2/  7/06  2/  8/06 

Persch,  Otto. . .                      17  N.  Clark  St 38  2/  9/06  7/31/06 

Peterson,  Gust. . .                    285  Noble  St 32  2/26/06  3/  2/06 

Prast,  Henry 1024  S.  California 24  3/2/11  3/13/11 

Pollock,  N...                1022  W.  Madison  St 27  7/3/12  9/30/12 

Phillips,  Seward 1524  W.  63rd  St 17  11/20/12  12/3/12 

Prica;  Milan  P. . .                        18  S.  Canal  St 27  2/15/13  3/31/13 

Premer,  Jno.,  &  Tom  Fitzgerald. .     17  N.  Union  St 27  7/  8/13  7/11/13 

Prescia.  A. ..                                    ..  .2011  S.  Clark  St 3  7/15/13  10/7/13 

Prenier  &  Fitzgerald 17  N.  Union  St 27  12/13/13  3/2/14 

Preston,  Rosy...            1808  S.  State  St 3  3/5/14  3/11/14 

Prenier  &  Fitzgerald 17  N.  Union  St 27  12/13/14  5/10/14 

Pool,  Abe...                              2724  State  St 4  8/24/14  9/5/14 

Prescia,  A.  . .                                    . .  .2011  S.  Clark  St 3  7/15/13  10/14/14 

PauzerBros...                        449  S.  Halsted  St 27  11/24/14  12/4/14 

Piecinin,  Wm.  Peter. 452  E.  31st  St 4  6/10/15  7/13/15 

Pranz,  Leon  C . .  .4920  Milwaukee  Ave 36  2/10/16  2/23/16 

Placek,  Joe.  . .                            2333  S.  Kedzie  Ave 23  1/10/16  2/15/16 

Parizek,  Leo 5762  Grand  Ave 37  2/16/16  2/23/16 

Polerecki,  Maria 4556  N.  Crawford  Ave 36  2/16/16  2/23/16 

Pachinak,  Frank 538  DeKoven  St 21  2/16/16  Not 

Pfeiffer,  Geo 1820  Wells  St 39  3/16/16  3/21/16 

O 

Quan,  John...                                  ...  7158  Aberdeen  St. ..  17  7/6/10  7/21/10 

Quail,  Mat..                            710  E.  39th  St 5  9/24/15  10/1/15 

Quinn.  John  J 500  S.  Kedzie  Ave 26  12/  6/15  12/29/15 

41  - 


EXHIBIT  "B"— Continued 


Present 

Address  at 

Police 

Date 

NAME 

Time  of  Revocation 

Precinct 

Revoked 

Restored 

R 

Rohrich,  Chas  

.   145  Wells  St  

38 

7/25/05 

8/15/05 

Ropke,  Fritz  

.3500  California  Ave  

8 

8/29/05 

ll/  4/05 

Ripley,  Joseph  

.  932  51st  St  

11 

9/29/05 

Not 

Rubogianes,  Geo.  D  

.133J^  W.  Madison  St  

27 

10/19/05 

ll/  4/05 

Robinson,  Geo  

.2442  State  St  

4 

12/28/05 

Not 

Ruse,  M  

.   491  E.  Division  Pt  

...        39 

2/  9/06 

2/23/06 

Renseh,  August  

.  1885  W.  Chicago  Ave  

30 

10/22/06 

10/29/06 

Rvpel,  Stvng  

.   889  Milwaukee  Ave  

32 

12/13/10 

12/19/10 

Ragiglee,  Santiv  

.1859  Lake  St  

28 

12/13/10 

12/23/10 

Ryan,  Wm.;  Jas.  Boiler,  Mgr  

.     38  S.  Halsted  St  

27 

10/23/11 

10/27/11 

Rose,  Herman  

.   130  W.  Erie  St  

38 

6/21/12 

7/12/12 

Riley,  Thomas  J  

5  N.  Clark  St  

1 

1/27/13 

1/30/13 

Rann,  William  

.3961  LakeSt  

30 

3/20/13 

3/21/13 

Rosenfeld,  David  

.  717  S.  State  St  

2 

5/16/13 

6/  5/13 

Rosenberg,  Max  

.1634  S.  State  St  

3 

5/19/13 

6/  3/13 

Rebeck,  Michael  

.  1826  Wabash  Ave  

3 

7/  3/13 

10/23/13 

Heunetz,  Matthew  

.   515  W.  North  Ave  

...       39 

7/  9/13 

7/10/13 

Rothaiser,  Rubin  

.   169  N.  5th  Ave  

1 

4/  1/14 

4/  8/14 

Robinson,  Louis  

.  2659  W.  North  Ave  

34 

5/12/14 

5/19/14 

Rauzzoti,  John  D  

.3101  W.  Madison  St  

29 

6/15/14 

6/30/14 

Russell,  Harry,  &  Sidney  D.  Dogo. 

.3142  S.  State  St  

5 

7/28/14 

8/26/14 

Rothschild  &  Bohlan  

.2136  Wabash  Ave  

3 

7/28/14 

10/30/14 

Reinstein,  Sol  

.   475  W.  Division  St  

...       38 

1/25/15 

2/  3/15 

Roth,  Frank  

.  924  N.  Robey  St  

32 

8/  4/15 

8/31/15 

Rangus,  Joseph  

.3300  S.  Halsted  St  

6 

9/10/15 

9/17/15 

Rosebrock,  Maria  

.  1059  Addison  St  

43 

12/22/15 

12/30/15 

Rindsberger,  Richard  

.  3848  Cottage  Grove  Ave.  .  .  . 

5 

12/28/15 

12/31/15 

Rosenfeld,  Thedore  

.3800  Federal  St  

...         .> 

12/28/15 

I/  7/16 

Robbs,  James  J  

.3800  Wallace  St  

6 

1/12/16 

1/21/16 

Roehr,  Gus  

.2025  W.  35th  St  

7 

1/13/16 

3/  1/16 

Reichert,  Herman  

.2108  Wabash  Ave  

3 

1/25/16 

2/25/16 

Roncoli,  Philip  

.   734  N.  Western  Ave  

32 

2/  3/16 

2/  7/16 

Roncoli,  Mrs.  Rose  

.  2401  W.  Chicago  Ave  

32 

2/  2/16 

2/  7/16 

Ripstein,  Wm  

.  1800  Belmont  Ave  

43 

2/15/16 

2/19/16 

Rudman,  Joseph  

.1800S.  Morgan  St  

22 

4/  7/16 

4/19/16 

S 

Smith,  Bernard  

.  1027  Van  Buren  St  

29 

11/14/05 

11/27/05 

Schultz,  Jacob  

.  219  W.  Randolph  St  

27 

12/21/05 

Not 

Snell,  W  

.     49  N.  Clark  St  

38 

2/  9/06 

6/22/06 

Simpson  &  Co  

.  3865  Cottage  Grove  Ave.  .  .  . 

5 

2/  9/06 

2/19/06 

Schroeh,  Geo  

.9100  Erie  Ave  

15 

7/27/06 

8/  6/06 

Seropoulos,  Andrew  

.  324  S.  Halsted  St  

21 

10/10/06 

10/23/06 

Sehroen,  Geo  

.9100  Erie  Ave  

15 

10/14/07 

Not 

Skinner,  W.  W  

.     45  N.  20th  St  

3 

8/  1/10 

10/31/10 

Sypinerski,  John  

.8410  Commercial  Ave  

15 

8/15/10 

10/31/10 

Siegel,  Louis  

.  3026  E.  92nd  St  

15 

9/  7/10 

9/19/10 

Sweeney,  Patrick  

.   703  So.  48th  Ave  

26 

11/22/10 

11/30/10 

Sullivan,  Michael  

.  1459  W.  Polk  St  

21 

12/13/10 

12/20/10 

Stermer,  Joseph  

.  5605  Grand  Ave  

...       37 

3/  3/11 

3/11/11 

Sheehan,  John  

.  2657  Clybourne  Ave  

32 

3/  3/11 

3/  9/11 

Sullivan,  Wm  

.  478  E.  31st  St  

...          4 

5/23/11 

6/  6/11 

Schoop,  Paul  

.   415  Wells  St..  . 

...       38 

7/29/11 

10/20/11 

Smith,  Henry;  Harry  Landan,  Mgr.  933  W.  Lake  St  

27 

ll/  9/11 

11/13/11 

Stonovitch,  Paul  

.     17  W.  Union  St  

27 

11/20/11 

1/10/12 

Shannon,  Edward  

.  1500  W.  12th  St  

21 

5/23/12 

7/25/12 

Swan,  Frank  E  

.6401  S.  Park  Ave  

12 

6/13/12 

10/31/12 

Sullivan,  Michael  

.  1425  W.  63rd  St  

17 

7/17/12 

7/25/12 

Schoop,  Paul  

.  421  Wells  St  

...       38 

8/20/12 

10/  2/12 

.3558  W.  12th  St  

26 

8/23/12 

9/  3/12 

Shannon,  Ed  

.1500  W.  12thSt  

21 

10/10/12 

ll/  1/12 

Shannon,  Edward  

.  1500  W.  12th  St  

...       21 

12/  7/12 

Sidias,  James  

.  1149  Wabash  Ave  

2 

'   1/25/13 

2/11/13 

Sidias,  James  

.  1149  Wabash  Ave  

2 

4/19/13 

4/30/13 

Slaughter,  Fred  

.2971  State  St  

4 

12/  2/12 

12/19/12 

Schoop,  Paul  

.  421  Wells  St  

38 

8/20/13 

2/28/13 

Shannon,  Ed  

.1500  W.  12th  St  

21 

10/  9/12 

5/  2/13 

Sullivan,  G.  A  

.   264  N.  Western  Ave  

.  .  .  .     29 

7/  9/13 

7/15/13 

Schneider,  Walter  P  , 

5901  S.  State  St  

11 

7/  9/13 

7/11/13 

Sheehy,  Wm.  P  

4147  S.  Halsted  St  

19 

9/  8/13 

9/16/13 

Scholl,  John  B  

.  6830  Stony  Is].  Ave  

12 

1/25/12 

4/21/13 

Swan,  Frank  E  

.6401  8.  Park  Ave  

12 

6/13/12 

7/  2/13 

Smith,  C.  N  

2118  State  St  

3 

7/  3/13 

10/29/13 

Smith,  David  

,   513  LaSalle  Ave  

...       38 

10/14/13 

10/28/13 

Sukzrla,  Joseph  

2458  S.  Oakley  Ave  

23 

12/31/13 

2/26/14 

Sundbrrg,  Alex  

.891  6  The  Strand  

15 

2/11/14 

4/  8/14 

42 


EXHIBIT  "B"— Continued 


NAME 


Address  at 
Time  of  Revocation 


Present 

Poljce 

Precinct 


Date 
Revoked 


Restored 


Sukzda,  Joseph 2458  S.  Oakley  Ave 23  12/31/13  2/26/14 

Shaughnessy  &  Mulligan 38  S.  Peoria  St 27  3/14/14  3/16/14 

Sidias,  James 1149  Wabash  Ave 3  4/19/14  5/  5/14 

Stanbury,  B.  J 18  and  22  E.  22nd  St 3  8/25/14  10/29/14 

Sanders,  Ernest  L 823  W.  Monroe  St 27  8/24/14  9/  3/14 

Stephen,  Philip 941  Washington  Blvd 27  8/25/14  10/  7/14 

Schreiber,  Max 538  N.  Clark  St 38  10/  2/14  10/30/14 

Saunders,  Ernest  L 823  W.  Monroe  St 27  10/14/14  10/30/14 

Stanbury,  B.  J 18  and  22  E.  22nd  St 3  8/24/14  1/13/15 

Snell,  John 1208  Wells  St 39  1/14/15  1/20/15 

Siraguska,  A 833  W.  Grand  Ave 32  1/16/15  1/26/16 

Sobota,  Stanley 614  N.  Racine  Ave 32  4/26/15  4/30/15 

Swanson,  Otto 3260  N.  Clark  St 42  6/10/15  7/  6/15 

Stulginsky,  Anna 4501  S.  Paulina  St 21  6/22/15  7/16/15 

Sage,  Al 613  W.  Madison  St 27  7/1/15  7/13/15 

Soltes,  Steven 956  W.  119th  St 9  7/2/15  7/16/15 

Singer,  Joseph 5600  N.  Clark  St 44  8/3/15  8/28/15 

Stanke,  John 1703  S.  Racine  Ave 22  10/  1/15  10/28/15 

Schmid.  Fred 3501  Irving  Pk.  Blvd 36  10/  8/15  10/26/15 

Sachs,  Jacob 31  E.  Grand  Ave 38  10/28/15  ll/  6/15 

Shaughnessy,  Ed.  J.  &  Mulligan  ...     3S  S.  Peoria  St 27  12/  6/15  12/10/15 

Simon,  Geo, 737  S.  State  St 2  12/17/15  1/17/16 

Sablon,  Albert 1230  School  St 43  12/22/15  12/30/15 

Schneider,  Walter  P 5901  State  St 11  12/30/15  12/31/15 

Schithe,  Wm.  Phil 6001  State  St 12  1/27/16  2/1/16 

Smith,  U.  S 3867  Grand  Ave 34  1/27/16  2/  7/16 

Sutter,  Martin 3258  N.  Ashland  Ave 43  2/  1/16  2/  5/16 

Sacks,  Leopold 6356  St.  Lawrence  Ave 12  2  /8/16  2/16/16 

Sullivan,  Wm 478  E.  31st  St 4  2/23/16  3/  1/16 

Simalasz,  Adam 2459  S.  Washtenaw  Ave 23  3/  6/16  3/  8/16 

Stanlin,  Thomas 1557  W.  12th  St 21  3/  8/16  3/  9/16 

Sullivan,  Frank 931  W.  Madison  St 27  3/21/16  3/31/16 

Sacks,  Jacob 31  E.  Grand  Ave 38  3/30/16  6/12/16 

Stensen,  Martin  &  Patrick 806  Rush  St 38  3/28/16  4/  1/16 

Smith,  Frank  J 648  N.  Dearborn  St 38  5/  9/16  5/18/16 

T 

Tuska,  Joseph ...                              . .  748  Allport.  .  .  22  8/10/05  8/18/05 

Tillatson,  A.  C 26  E.  16th  St 3  1/23/06  2/  1/06 

Thomas,  Robt 809  W.  Lake  St 28  10/17/07  10/31/07 

Thompson,  Chas 813-815  Monroe  St 27  5/13/12  6/17/12 

Trepeck,  Abe 2601  S.  State  St 4  6/13/12  7/19/12 

Townlews  &  Greinerich 2325  S.  Leavitt  St 23  8/  5/12  8/10/12 

Tuckhorn,  Simon 24W.QuincySt 1  12/5/12  4/30/13 

Trautman,  Albert ". 2059  N.  Halsted  St 40  1/11/13  1/24/13 

Thompson  &  Enwright 768  Van  Buren  St 27  2/11/13  3/11/13 

Thomas,  John 2037  Wabash  Ave.  1 3  4/12/13  4/30/13 

Tuckhorn,  Simon 24  W.  Quincy  St 1  12/31/12  5/22/13 

Tourney  &  Shinglcton 12  E.  28th  St 4  7/  9/13  7/11/13 

Terhan,  F.  J 1001  W.  Madison  St 27  3/14/14  3/23/14 

Torio,  John 2001  Archer  Ave 3  5/29/14  6/  1/14 

Torria,  John 2001  Archer  Ave 3  7/30/14  10/26/14 

Tompewsky,  Julius UN.  Western  Ave 29  8/29/14  10/  1/14 

Tampersky,  Julius UN.  Western  Ave 29  8/29/14  12/21/14 

Taylor,  Edward 3122  Cottage  Grove  Ave 5  12/30/14           1/13/15 

Truszunski,  Geo 900  W.  38th  St 6  12/  4/15  12/30/15 

Taney,  Archie 100  W.  47th  St 11  2/16/16  2/21/16 

Trojan,  Michael 1100  Jefferson  St 21  5/19/16  5/23/16 

U 

Ulrich,  Henry.  ..                             ..  .2126  Wabash  Ave.  .  3  2/9/06             Not 

Uhelhorn,  Herman 833  W.  Lake  St 27  1/27/13           2/24/13 

Urbutis,  C.  &  F.  Yogel 4458  S.  Ashland  Ave 20  3/27/16           6/  8/16 

V 

Van  Dusen,  Frank 155  E.  Washington  St 1  3/14/06           5/  3/06 

Valpe,  Dixnito 616  N.  Sangamon  St 32  3/  3/11           3/  9/11 

Vlack,  Jos.  F 2000  Wabash  Ave 3  7/8/13  10/31/13 

Van  Hessen 9174  Harbor  Ave 15  11/7/13          4/6/14 

Vogel,  Charles 1440  S.  Halsted  St 21  4/6/14           4/27/14 

Van  Hessen,  M.  S 9174  Harbor  Ave 15  ll/  7/13           4/  6/14 

Volkman,  John 4058  Madison  St 30  9/20/15           3/6/16 

43 


EXHIBIT  "B"— Continued 


Present 

Address  at 

Police 

Date 

NAME 

Time  of  Revocation 

Precinct 

Revoked 

Restored 

W 

Weisse,  Louis  E  

.  .3464  Auburn  Ave  

6 

6/13/05 

6/22/05 

Weiss,  Edward  

.  .  438-440  S.  State  St  

2 

9/29/05 

Not 

Weborg,  Andrew  and  Co  

.  .  341  Milwaukee  Ave  

32 

9/12/06 

10/23/06 

Wyman,  J.  B  

.  .  948  W.  63rd  St  

17 

10/  8/06 

10/30/06 

Wojtyla,  Michael  

,  .  .     30  Kascinski  

35 

10/23/06 

ll/  2/06 

Williams,  C.  A  

,  .  .4845  S.  Ashland  Ave  

20 

ll/  8/06 

11/13/06 

Ware,  Arthur  

.  .     16  N.  Green  St  

.  ..       27 

4/  8/08 

4/30/08 

Ware,  B.  Arthur  

.  .  238  W.  Lake  St  

27 

4/  8/08 

4/30/08 

Wall,  H.  F  

.  .4201  Archer  Ave  

8 

3/  3/11 

3/  7/11 

We  xler,  Samuel  

.  .  446  LaSalle  Ave  

38 

7/25/11 

9/28/11 

Wiggenhauser,  Julius  

.  .  954  W.  Lake  St  

27 

4/11/12 

4/30/12 

Walsh,  Jas.  ;  Nick  Berror,  Mgr.  .  . 

.  .6314  Cottage  Grove  Ave.  .  .  . 

,  ..       12 

4/  4/13 

4/18/13 

Williams,    Harry;    H.    J.    Crick 

& 

Thos.  Awens,  Props  

.  .2120  Wabash  Ave  

3 

7/  3/13 

10/29/13 

Woods,  Edward  

.  .  1602  Wabash  Ave  

3 

7/  3/13 

8/  1/13 

Wilson,  H.  C.  &  J.  Herman  

.  .6331  S.  Halsted  St  

17 

8/  8/13 

8/19/13 

Woods,  Edwards  

.  .  1602  Wabash  Ave  

3 

7/  3/13 

9/  2/13 

Weiss,  Ed  

.  .     32  W.  22nd  St  

3 

10/21/13 

12/  1/13 

.  .9026  The  Strand  

15 

12/26/13 

6/  9/14 

Weiss,  Ed  

.  .2136  N.  State  St  , 

3 

2/  2/14 

5/  5/14 

Washa,  Anton  

.  .  3860  Madison  St  

30 

6/17/14 

7/  8/14 

Weiss,  Ed  

.  .     32  W.  22nd  St  

3 

2/  2/14 

6/19/14 

Wenghoffer,  Joseph  

.  .  3925  Montrose  Ave  , 

...       36 

9/  8/14 

9/10/14 

Walsh,  Jas  

.  .6314  Cottage  Grove  Ave. 

12 

4/  4/13 

11/20/14 

Wirizenburg,  Jno.  W  

.  .3035  S.  State  St  

4 

3/  1/15 

3/24/15 

Wanrzvusski,  Ignatz  

.  .4324  S.  Ashland  Ave  , 

20 

6/22/15 

11  1/15 

Widovich,  Daniel  

.  .  9427  Ewing  Ave  

15 

ll/  6/15 

11/30/15 

Weghun  &  Jones  

..2501  W.  LakeSt  

.  .        29 

11/18/15 

12/18/15 

Withersen,  Clara  

.  .3625  Fullerton  Ave  

35 

12/11/15 

12/17/15 

Wedzumas,  Geo.  W  

.  .3857  S.  Kedzie  Ave  

8 

12/17/15 

12/20/15 

Wozruck,  Geo.  V  

.  .5200  Roscoe  St  

..       36 

1/21/16 

2/  3/16 

Webber,  Joe  

.  .  428  Milwaukee  Ave  

32 

1/10/16 

3/11/16 

Wallace  &  O'Brien  

.  .  437  S.  Racine  Ave  

27 

2/23/16 

3/24/16 

Wilson,  Chas.  C  

.  .  2443  Armitage  Ave  

..       34 

3/13/16 

Not 

Winrier  Louis  

.  .4000  Lincoln  Ave  

43 

5/18/16 

5/29/16 

White,  Gus  

.  10003  Ewing  Ave  

16 

6/12/16 

Not 

Y 

Yinsos,  Phillip..  . 

.  .2806  Cottage  Grove  Ave  

4 

6/10/15 

9/29/15 

Yarbich,  Mike  

.  .8957  Green  Bay  Ave  

15 

12/23/15 

1/17/16 

Yuknis,  Anne  

.  .  1620  S.  Union  St  

22 

4/12/16 

4/18/16 

Z 

Ziska,  Charles  

.  .  2514  Princeton  Ave  

3 

'2/11/11 

2/23/11 

Zemek,  Thomas  

.  .  1934  W.  Harrison  St  

24 

3/  6/14 

3/13/14 

Zellen,  Ben  

6E.  22nd  St  

3 

2/15/15 

5/25/15 

Zallinski,  A  

.  .3232  Drake  Ave  

..       36 

12/  6/15 

12/11/15 

Zallinski,  Andira  

.  .3232  Drake  Ave  

36 

2/16/16 

3/29/16 

Zacharias,  A  

.  .  1256  Sedgwick  St  

..       39 

5/  3/16 

5/15/16 

Zrezich,  John  

..2294  Blue  Isl.  Ave  

..       23 

6/  1/16 

6/13/16 

44 


EXHIBIT   "C 


APPENDIX  B 

Deply  of  the  Chicago  Brewers'  Protective  Association 

to  the  Questionnaire  issued  by  the  Chicago  Commission 

on  the  Liquor  Problem  on  the  Financial  and  Economic 

aspects  of  the  use  of   Intoxicating   Liquors   in   Chicago 


APRIL,  1916 

NOTE — The  Reply  on  account  of  its  length  is  not  reprin- 
ted herein.     Copies  of   the  reply  of  the  Chicago  Brewers' 
Protective  Association  are  available  for  free  public  inspection 
and  use  in   the  Municipal   Reference  Library,   Room    1005 
•City  Hall. 


APPENDIX  C 


Digest  pf  Hearings 


BEFORE  THE 


CHICAGO  COMMISSION 


ON  THE 


LIQUOR  PROBLEM 


Mr.   E.  J..  Davis. 

Chicago   District   Superintendent,   Anti-Saloon   League   of   Illinois. 

The  idea  is  suggested  that  it  would  be  better  for  economic  conditions  to 
have  the  unfortunate  victims  of  the  liquor  traffic  continue  to  be  drunken  and 
worthless  than  to  give  them  a  chance  to  become  sober,  self-respecting  and 
earning  members  of  the  community.  The  questions  relating  to  the  economic 
side  of  the  liquor  problem  are  mostly  silly  or  worse.  To  argue  that  there  is  an 
economic  benefit  to  the  public  at  large  from  the  liquor  traffic  is  an  absurdity. 
It  would  be  as  silly  to  recommend  to  the  people  the  purchasing  every  year  of  a 
hundred  million  dollars  worth  of  merchandise  which  it  does  not  need  and  de- 
stroy it  in  order  to  help  labor  and  business  and -stimulate  real  estate  values, 
etc.,  as  to  advocate  the  same  expenditure  for  booze  for  economic  reasons.  It 
would  be  less  silly,  there  would  be  no  expense  for  caring  for  the  dependents 
caused  by  the  expenditure.  You  are  asking  for  the  payment  of  a  hundred  mil- 
lion dollars  per  year  by  the  people  for  the  benefit  of  the  liquor  lords  and  trying 
to  fool  the  people  into  thinking  they  are  getting  something  for  their  money. 
The  hundred  million  dollars  will  be  spent  whether  it  goes  into  the  tills  of  the 
saloonkeeper  and  brewers  or  into  the  tills  of  legitimate  merchants. 

A  man  spending  $18  at  retail  for  a  barrel  of  beer  gives  employment  to 
only  one-third  as  much  labor  as  though  he  spend  it  for  shoes,  or  for  furniture, 
or  for  other  legitimate  merchandise.  If  he  spends  $18  for  beer  he  has  nothing 
of  value  for  himself  or  his  family.  If  he  spends  it  for  useful  articles  he  not 
only  has  employed  more  labor  but  he  has  something  of  value  for  himself. 

It  is  quite  true  that  saloons  rent  buildings,  employ  bartenders,  teamsters, 
blacksmiths,  and  many  kindred  lines  of  labor,  but  what  of  that?  So  also 
would  the  purchasing  of  merchandise  which  was  immediately  destroyed  cause 
the  employment  of  labor.  Consider  the  labor  that  will  be  demanded  to  make  a 
hundred  million  dollars  worth  of  useful  merchandise.  When  the  hundred  mil- 
lion dollars  now  spent  in  Chicago  for  booze  is  spent  for  useful  things  each 
merchant's  trade  will  be  largely  increased,  each  factory  will  have  more  orders, 
and  it  will  require  more  labor.  The  expenditure  of  a  hundred  million  dollars 
in  the  legitimate  channels  of  trade  will  mean  at  least  twenty-five  million  dollars 
gross  profit  in  the  tills  of  the  merchants  and  manufacturers  from  which  they 
could  well  afford  to  pay  the  eight  million  dollars  which  the  liquor  interests  pay 
for  the  privilege  of  collecting  the  hundred  million  dollars  from  the  people  over 
their  bars.  This  will  be  true  even  though  there  were  no  decrease  in  the  ex- 
penses of  the  city  government  nor  increase  in  the  amount  of  taxable  property. 

All  of  the  above  is  figured  on  the  basis  of  people  destroying  the  hundred 
million  dollars  worth  of  merchandise  as  soon  as  they  buy  it  as  they  would 
then  certainly  be  no  worse  off  than  if  they  had  spent  it  for  booze,  and  the 
general  public  will  be  far  better  off  because  of  the  increased  amount  of  labor 
which  the  money  expended  in  the  legitimate  channels  of  trade  will  employ. 
Even  under  such  conditions  the  economic  community  will  be  far  better  off 
than  when  the  money  is  spent  in  the  saloons. 

But  consider  what  will  happen  to  a  community  when  the  hundred  mil- 
lion dollars  is  not  only  spent  for  valuable  merchandise  but  the  merchandise  is 
saved  by  the  purchaser — then  not  alone  will  labor  and  merchandise  profit  by 
the  expenditure  but  the  purchases  will  increase  the  valuable  holdings  of  the 
people.  Soon  there  will  be  a  great  increase  in  taxable  property  and  also  the 
legitimate  merchant  having  done  an  increased  business  his  profits  will  increase 
and  he  will  become  more  prosperous  and  a  larger  taxpayer.  On  the  other  hand, 
crimes  and  disorder  will  grow  less,  'the  cost  of  government  will  diminish  and 
the  income  through  the  legitimate  channels  of  taxation  will  be  larger.  This  is 
not  only  common  sense  for  Chicago,  but  it  is  the  experience  of  every  community 
which  has  set  its  heel  upon  the  liquor  traffic  and  ground  it  to  pieces. 

Under  the  wet  regime  the  taxes  in  the  City  of  Rockford  were  $5.48  per 
hundred  of  assessed  valuation;  under  the  dry  regime  it  is  $4.51  and  it  is  con- 
stantly decreasing,  brought  about  by  the  above  process — decrease  in  the  cost  of 
government  and  the  increased  amount  of  taxable  property.  The  same  thing 
is  true  all  over  the  State  of  Illinois  and  throughout  the  country  where  the 
law  has  been  enforced.  It  is  true  there  will  be  a  period  of  re-adjustment  to  go 
through,  there  will  be  some  expense  in  the  prosecution  of  lawless  violations 
of  the  prohibitory  law,  but  the  fines  paid  by  the  lawbreakers  will  more  than 
compensate  for  the  expense  of  prosecutions  as  has  been  demonstrated  all  over 

49 


the  State  of  Illinois  in  the  prosecution  of  bootleggers,  in  dry  territory.  In  the 
single  city  of  Decatur  the  fines  against  bootleggers  at  one  term  of  court  aggre- 
gated over  $42,000  and  everywhere  over  the  state  the  fines  have  been  much 
larger  than  the  cost  of  prosecution.  In  closing  I  want  to  say  regarding  the 
whole  question  of  the  economic  aspect  of  the  liquor  question,  it  would  be  just 
as  silly,  but  no  more  so,  to  argue  war  as  an  economic  asset.  The  manufacture 
of  war  material  employs  labor  but  war  is  a  waste. 

The  whole  matter  may  be  compared  to  the  village  on  the  New  England 
sea  coast  in  early  days  which  lived  almost  entirely  from  the  salvage  of  wrecked 
vessels.  These  villagers  sent  a  delegation  to  their  state  legislature  protesting 
against  the  erection  of  a  lighthouse  claiming  that  it  would  stop  the  wrecks  and 
injure  their  means  of  a  livelihood.  To  be  sure  it  would.  No  individual  was 
ever  known  to  drink  himself  rich  and  no  amount  of  sophistry  can  make  it  true 
that  a  community  can  do  so  either. 

Mr.   Philip   Freiler. 

I  was  formerly  in  the  wholesale  whiskey  business  in  Elgin.  My  residence 
is  in  Elgin,  Illinois.  My  occupation  you  might  put  down  as  a  distiller,  because 
I  still  operate  a  distillery  in  Louisville.  Elgin  has  been  a  dry  city  since  a  year 
ago  last  May.  The  town  was  voted  dry  the  7th  of  April,  or  the  first  Tuesday 
in  April,  and  went  dry  30  days  after  that.  There  were  34  saloons  in  the  city 
when  Elgin  was  wet.  There  were  two  breweries. 

All  the  saloons  were  wiped  out  when  Elgin  became  dry  and  one  of  the 
breweries  went  into  the  hands  of  a  receiver  and  the  other  is  still  operating. 
Some  of  the  buildings  occupied  by  the  34  saloons  are  still  vacant.  The  Ramsey 
House  had  a  saloon.  The  place  that  Mr.  Bodenschatz  was  in  has  been  vacant 
ever  since.  The  landlady  who  owned  the  place  opened  up  a  little  5  and  10  cent 
store,  but  closed  it  after  four  or  five  weeks. 

The  saloons  were  all  in  good  locations.  In  a  city  the  size  of  Elgin,  all  the 
business  property  is  in  what  they  call  the  fire  limits,  one  little  square  of  about 
four  square  blocks.  There  were  no  saloons  in  the  residence  sections,  as  there 
is  a  city  ordinance  prohibiting  saloons  outside  of  the  fire  limits.  The  fire  limits 
is  practically  the  business  center. 

Then  there  was  Charles  Anderson  whose  place  is  being  run  as  a  club  room, 
with  soft  drinks.  This  place  of  Anderson's  was  formerly  rented  for  $65  a 
month,  and  he  now  pays  $30.  Then  there  was  the  place  J.  T.  Mullins  occu- 
pied. He  now  occupies  a  place  right  opposite  our  public  park,  in  Cook  County. 
His  building  rented  for  $100  a  month  and  now  brings  $87  for  a  5  and  10  cent 
store.  C.  H.  Cordes'  place  brought  $62  a  month  as  a  saloon,  and  there  is  a  tin 
shop  in  there  now  paying  $50.  The  place  occupied  by  Henry  Mack  formerly 
brought  $90  a  month,  and  they  now  run  a  club  room  in  there  that  brings  $60  a 
month.  P.  Gilles  ran  a  saloon,  and  now  that  is  rented  for  a  shoe  repair  shop. 
He  paid  $75  a  month  and  it  is  now  renting  for  $75  a  month.  Siems  &  Ramsay's 
former  building  is  rented  for  an  ice  cream  parlor  at  about  the  same  rate,  $100 
a  month,  but  the  owner  spent  $1,500  for  repairs.  Gus  Peterson's  place  which 
formerly  brought  $115,  now  has  a  drug  store  in  it  which  brings  $90.  Broder- 
son's  place  is  now  run  as  a  pool  and  billiard  hall.  They  pay  $110,  the  same 
as  they  formerly  paid.  W.  H.  Snow  is  running  a  club  and  is  holding  the 
building  pending  Elgin  ever  going  wet  again,  if  it  goes  wet  again.  He  is  run- 
ning a  club  room  there.  He  paid  $125  but  the  building  is  now  under  lease  for 
$200.  The  Eisenbraun  is  a  building  that  he  refused  $16,500  for  six  months 
prior  to  the  election.  After  Elgin  went  dry  he  rented  the  whole  building  for  $70 
a  month,  and  there  is  a  billiard  and  pool  hall  in  there  now.  Nick  Goedert's 
place  has  a  dyers  and  cleaners  in  it  now.  That  formerly  paid  $50  a  month, 
and  is  now  paying  $50.  Herman  Vierke  paid  $60  a  month.  The  Fox  River 
Express  Company  is  now  in  that  place,  and  paying-  $30;  and  in  fact,  they  are 
renting  it  from  day  to  day,  for  $1.00  a  day.  L.  Humbracht's  place  formerly 
brought  $60.  There  is  a  club  room  in  there  now  paying  $40.  There  is  a  pool 
and  billiard  hall  in  Frank  DeLancey's  place  now.  He  formerly  paid  $80,  and  it 
is  now  bringing  $30.  Charles  Hintt  is  running  a  soft  drink  parlor  in  the  place 
he  formerly  paid  $85  for,  and  is  now  paying  $50.  The  Washington  House 
turned  into  a  soft  drink  parlor.  The  Elgin  Eagle  headquarters  formerly  paid 
$70  a  month,  and  has  been  vacant  ever  since  the  town  has  gone  dry.  The  Elgin 
National  Headquarters  paid  $45  a  month.  There  is  a  club  there  now  at  a  lower 
rental.  My  own  building  has  been  vacant  ever  since  the  town  went  dry.  It  is 

50 


a  two-story  and  basement  50  foot  front  by  70  deep,  that  I  refused  $35,000  for 
six  months  prior  to  the  election.  One  of  the  leading  drys  sent  his  emissary  to 
me  about  four  or  five  months  after  the  election — and,  by  the  way,  those  gentle- 
men were  claiming  prior  to  the  election  that  rentals  and  real  estate  value  would 
increase  very  materially  if  the  town  went  dry.  This  man  had  the  nerve  to  tell 
me  that  if  I  would  entertain  a  proposition  of  from  $15,000  to  $16,000  he  could 
find  me  a  buyer,  for  a  piece  of  property  that  a  few  months  before  election  I  had 
refused  $35,000  for.  Frank  Lasher  who  ran  the  best  place  in  town,  leased  his 
place  for  an  ice  cream  and  soft  drink  parlor  for  $175  a  month.  He  owns  the 
property  and  it  is  the  best  location  in  town;  and  to  illustrate  to  you  about  the 
actual  value  of  that  store,  there  is  a  drug  store  right  across  the  street  from  his 
place  that  you  might  put  four  of  into  Mr.  Lasher's  place,  and  it  is  on  the  wrong 
side  of  the  street,  too,  but  they  pay  $150  a  month  for  rent.  Lasher's  place,  how- 
ever, is  being  rented  for  an  ice  cream  parlor  for  $175. 

William  Hess  paid  $45  a  month,  and  there  is  a  shooting  gallery  in  there 
now  paying  $45  a  month.  C.  E.  Pond's  place  formerly  brought  $65  a  month, 
and  is  now  under  lease  for  $45,  but  is  vacant.  In  the  Fritz  &  Ottoe  place,  the 
owners  started  a  clothing  store,  and  ran  a  clothing  store  there  so  as  to  occupy 
the  place  after  the  building  had  been  vacant  for  some  time,  but  they  have  not 
made  expenses,  and  an  option  has  already  been  given  to  a  saloon  man,  in  case 
the  town  goes  wet.  The  Freiler  estate  owns  a  building  there  that  was  rented 
for  $65 — the  store  was.  There  is  a  tailor  shop  in  there  now,  a  tailor  repair  and 
shoe  repair  shop — two  tenants.  They  pay  $33.50  a  month.  I  got  $65  for  it  when 
the  town  was  licensed.  The  Jacobs'  place  is  one  of  the  few  places  in  Elgin 
that  has  been  rented  to  advantage  since  the  town  has  gone  dry.  Very  fortu- 
nate for  the  owners  of  the  building,  after  they  spent  $3,000  in  fixing  it 'up,  they 
got  the  new  speedometer  company  that  has  started  in  Elgin  to  rent  it  for  a 
term  of  years;  but  that  was  just  a  chance  shot.  In  Gribble  Bros.'  place  they 
paid  formerly  $70  a  month,  and  it  is  now  occupied  by  a  paint  and  wall  paper 
concern  that  is  paying  $35.  The  Keegan  place  paid  $70  formerly,  and  there  IB  a 
grocery  store  in  there  now  paying  $60.  The  Beier  place  is  occupied  by  the 
Wells-Fargo  people,  who  moved  out  of  a  very  good  building  which  has  been 
vacant  ever  since  they  moved  out,  because  the  Beier  saloon  was  right  along- 
side of  the  St.  Paul  tracks,  and  they  do  their  business  all  over  the  St.  Paul 
road.  The  Niles  place  which  paid  $100  a  month  has  been  vacant  ever  since  the 
town  has  gone  dry,  but  the  place  is  under  lease  and  I  think  the  landlord  is  get- 
ting rent.  Van  Meter's  place  is  run  now  as  a  soft  drink  parlor,  and  there  are 
some  15  vacant  stores.  After  the  town  went  dry  quite  a  few  businesses  started 
there  on  account  of  getting  cheaper  rent.  We  had  four  or  five  restaurants 
started,  but  two  of  them  went  broke  within  six  months.  We  recently  had  a 
failure  there,  in  a  large  ready-to-wear  ladies  clothes  business,  of  something  like 
$15,000.  I  do  not  think  they  will  get  ten  cents  on  the  dollar — the  creditors. 
The  only  chance  I  have  had  of  renting  my  building  was  to  one  of  these  Italian 
clothing  merchants,  who  wanted  to  rent  it  for  a  purpose  of  that  kind,  because 
it  was  the  season  when  the  merchants  there  expected  to  do  some  business — 
that  was  some  time  last  fall — and  he  only  wanted  to  go  in  there  for  a  week  or 
ten  days.  In  fact,  he  would  not  rent  it  for  more  than  one  week  at  a  time,  and 
I  would  not  have  rented  it,  anyway,  because  I  would  have  had  to  do  a  lot  of 
fixing  up  in  order  to  get  a  tenant  for  a  week,  and  it  would  not  have  been  worth 
it.  I  was  going  to  say  about  this  speedometer  concern,  that  the  man  who 
owned  that  building  had  to  spend  about  $3,000  in  improvements  to  fix  it  up,  just 
for  them.  He  really  spent  two  or  three  years'  rent  in  order  to  get  a  tenant. 
Now,  as  to  the  pool  rooms  and  clubs  that  I  referred  to  one  of  our  papers  that 
was  very  dry  during  the  last  campaign  claimed  at  one  time  that  there  were  86 
blind  pigs  in  Elgin.  Most  of  them  are  in  the  places  that  I  designated  as  pool 
rooms  or  club  rooms.  They  fine  them,  and  fine  them  repeatedly,  but  it  does 
not  amount  to  anything.  They  open  right  up  again.  I  think  that  they  have 
been  fined,  according  to  what  one  of  the  papers  stated  the  other  day,  some- 
thing like  $3,600  in  fines  that  have  been  imposed  in  a  very  short  time  on  what 
they  call  blind  pigs.  But  those  were  operated  as  club  rooms.  The  revenue 
people  were  there  a  short  time  ago,  and  compelled  about  25  of  them — I  do  npt 
know  as  this  is  just  accurate,  but  it  was  rumored  around,  and  in  fact  the  papers 
so  stated,  that  there  were  25  of  them  compelled  to  take  out  a  revenue  license, 
because  they  were  selling  liquor  without  having  a  license. 

The  revenue  from  the  saloon  licenses  in  Elgin  was  thirty-four  thousand 

51 


dollars;  one  thousand  dollars  a  year,  payable  in  two  payments.  No  new  banks 
have  been  started  since  Elgin  went  dry,  but  I  can  tell  you  the  financial  con- 
ditions of  the  present  banks.  That  was  one  of  the  stock  remarks  of  the  drys, 
that  savings  would  immediately  increase — when  a  community  goes  dry. 

I  can  give  you  the  figures  taken  right  from  the  banks.  I  wish  to  say  that 
our  banks  within  the  last  two  years — our  savings  banks — have  adopted  the 
same  method  that  some  of  your  Chicago  banks  have  had  for  years,  of  advocat- 
ing little  savings  clubs  of  ten  cents  or  a  quarter;  and  that,  naturally,  would 
bring  a  great  deal  more  business.  On  June  4th — I  took  these  dates  in  going 
over  the  trial  balance  at  the  banks,  and  the  figures  I  got  from  the  statements 
about  the  time  that  the  town  went  dry.  In  June,  1913,  the  money  on  hand  in 
the  two  leading  savings  banks — there  are  two  (the  others  also  have  some  sav- 
ings accounts  which  I  did  not  get  on  account  of  being  only  national  banks) 
was  $2,394,560.14.  In  June,  1914 — this  was  during  the  wet  regime — there  was 
$2,449,810.45.  June,  1915,  after  the  town  had  been  dry  one  year,  there  was 
$2,367,419.44,  or  a  loss  of  about  $80,000  in  savings  in  the  savings  account  in  the 
two  large  banks  there;  which  conclusively  shows  to  me  that  it  is  a  fallacy  to 
claim,  that  the  savings  account  will  increase,  and  the  poor  people  will  save 
more  money. 

The  cash  on  hand  in  the  corporate  funds  of  the  City  of  Elgin  on  January 
1,  1912,  was  $4,364.86.  That  was  when  the  town  was  wet.  On  January  1,  1913, 
there  was  in  the  corporate  funds  on  hand  $2,164.22.  On  January  1,  1914,  there 
was  no  cash  on  hand.  On  January  1,  1915,  there  was  no  cash  on  hand.  On 
January  1,  1916,  there  was  no  cash  on  hand.  On  the  first  of  January,  1914,  anti- 
cipation tax  warrants  outstanding  amounted  to  $7,591.12.  There  were  none 
prior  to. that;  they  never  had  any  anticipation  tax  warrants  that  I  know  of.  On 
January  1,  1915 — that  is  when  they  began  to  feel,  the  shortage  from  the  saloon 
licenses — there  were  no  corporate  funds  on  hand,  and  the  anticipation  tax 
warrants  outstanding  amounted  to  $32,113.86.  On  January  1,  1916,  there  were 
no  corporate  funds  on  hand,  and  the  anticipation  tax  warrants  outstanding 
amounted  to  $34,999.83.  In  other  words,  Elgin  is  in  the  hole  today  17  cents  less 
than  $35,000,  and  it  is-  the  first  time  in  the  history  of  Elgin,  within  my  recollec- 
tion, and  I  have  lived  there  for  35  or  36  years,  that  they  ever  had  to  issue  anti- 
cipation warrants. 

They  simply  have  to  retrench  and  a  great  many  contemplated  improve- 
ments will  not  be  accomplished  if  the  town  remains  dry.  In  the  last  year  par- 
ticularly, the  drys  claim  that  it  is  owing  to  the  crooks  being  driven  out  of  Chi- 
cago, we  have  had  some  burglaries  there,  more  than  we  ever  had  before,  and  our 
chief  of  police  claims  that  it  is  owing  to  the  lack  of  enough  policemen.  I  think 
that  if  our  city  marshal  was  asked  right  now,  he  would  say  that  he  should  have 
half  a  dozen  or  ten  more  officers. 

I  have  gathered  statistics  for  a  number  of  years  in  our  wet  and  dry  fights, 
and  from  about  10  years  ago  the  number  of  drunks  kept  decreasing  each  year, 
kept  going  down.  I  remember  one  report  taken  from  the  police  magistrate's- 
office — and  they  only  have  one  there,  so  he  has  all  these  cases,  they  all  come 
before  him — and  there  were  something  like  600  drunks  arrested  in  one  year;  and 
then  it  dwindled  down  from  year  to  year,  growing  less  each  year,  until  the 
year  1914,  when  we  had  our  fight.  That  former  record  from  January,  1913,  to 
January,  1914,  I  think  showed  231  drunks  arrested  for  drunkenness  in  a  town 
with  a  population  of  approximately  27,000 — which  I  think  is  an  unbeatable  rec- 
ord. The  police  adopted  a  method  since  the  town  has  gone  dry  of  not  arresting 
a  man  for  being  drunk  unless  he  is  so  intoxicated  that  he  cannot  navigate.  Then 
they  put  him  on  a  street  car,  and  tell  the  conductor  to  let  him  off  at  his  house, 
or  the  nearest  place  to  his  house.  In  Dundee  on  Saturday — north  of  us — they 
have  had  more  drunks  since  Elgin  has  gone  dry  than  they  ever  had  before  in 
their  entire  history,  and  it  is  one  of  the  oldest  towns  in  the  state.  There  are 
fully  as  many  there,  but  in  Elgin  itself  there  are  not  so  many,  from  the  very 
fact  that  I  have  just  stated  to  you,  that  the  police  force,  instead  of  putting  a 
man  in  the  "jug,"  sends  him  home,  puts  him  on  a  street  car  and  sends  him  home 
unless  he  is  so  drunk  that  he  cannot  navigate,  and  then  they  take  him  to  the 
station. 

I  think  the  entire  town  has  suffered.  I  may  be  biased  in  my  opinion,  but  I 
am  pretty  level-headed,  and  I  would  not  say  'this  unless  I  thought  so.  I  know 
that  I  had  nine  men  in  my  employ,  and  only  two  of  them  got  work,  and  it  was 
by  very  hard  work  that  I  got  them  positions.  One  of  them  today,  a  man  who 

52 


was  with  me  21  years,  is  an  assistant  starter  down  at  the  car  barn  now,  getting 
about  $45  or  $50  a  month,  where  I  paid  him  $20  a  week.  Another  is  a  motorman 
and  I  do  not  know  what  he  is  getting.  I  paid  him  $20  a  week. 

Mr.  Thomas  Greif. 

The  statement  in  regard  to  the  objectionable  saloons  from  Mr.  Oehne,  is  to 
a  certain  extent  all  right,  but  I  think  you  will  find  very  few  saloons  that  are  ob- 
jectionable where  the  party  owns  the  license  and  the  fixtures.  A  man  who 
owns  his  own  license  and  fixtures  and  has  his  own  money  invested  looks  to  it 
that  he  is  carrying  on  his  business  in  a  straight  way.  Once  we  had  a  new 
captain  in  our  section,  the  Shakespeare  avenue  police  station.  He  called  in  a 
lot  of  the  saloonkeepers  in  that  section  and  gave  us  a  lecture  as  to  how  we 
should  conduct  our  saloons  and  if  we  did  not  follow  that  our  licenses  would 
be  revoked.  I  asked  him  what  would  be  done  with  those  licenses  controlled 
by  the  brewery.  "Well,"  he  says  "we  are  not  here  to  debate  this,  the  attorney 
will  take  care  of  their  license."  A  man  that  has  a  license  controlled  by  a 
brewer  doesn't  care  a  continental;  he  runs  it  to  make  money.  In  Chicago  there 
are  7,150  saloons  and  I  claim  that  out  of  the  7,150  saloons,  roughly  estimating, 
there  are  2,000  saloons  losing  money  every  day.  Two  thousand  make  a  living; 
3,000  make  money  and  maybe  2,000  make  a  nice  little  saving.  A  thousand  may 
make  a  fortune.  These  2,000  losing  money  are  always  replaced  by  the  breweries; 
when  you  go  to  a  brewer  and  want  to  get  a  saloon  they  do  not  ask  your  char- 
acter: they  ask  you  how  much  money  you  have — I  had  that  experience  myself. 
There  are  certain  breweries  that  are  very  careful  about  who  they  put  in,  and 
there  are  some  of  them  who  do  not  care  anything  about  it;  they  do  not  care  as 
long  as  the  place  is  going. 

After  the  time  the  Harkins'  ordinance  was  passed  for  the  first  couple  of 
years,  the  breweries  gobbled  up  the  licenses.  A  man  went  out  of  business  and 
they  said  some  got  out  in  a  creditable  way  and  some  some  other  way.  A  man 
may  want  to  run  a  saloon  and  he  gives  $500  to  some  agent.  He  has  to  sign  his 
name.  The  agent  puts  that  money  in  his  pocket.  Before  you  know  it  he  has 
assigned  the  license  over  to  a  brewery  and  he  has  to  make  a  big  fight  to  get 
it  in  his  own  name  again.  The  breweries  get  many  licenses  in  that  way.  I 
know  one  man  they  charged  $250  a  year  for  using  the  license.  A  license  at  the 
present  time  is  not  worth  anything. 

The  saloon  business  has  improved  since  I  was  in  it  first.  I  started  in  1877. 
At  that  time  you  could  walk  into  a  saloon  and  there  was  a  bar  and  a  gambling 
table  and  in  the  back  there  were  girls,  and  it  was  open  at  that  time. 

It  has  improved  a  great  deal.  It  takes  more  money  now  to  go  into  the 
saloon  business  than  it  did  at  that  time. 

A  better  class  of  people  are  engaged  in  the  saloon  business  at  the  present 
time. 

If  I  had  the  say  about  the  giving  of  licenses,  I  would  take  the  licensing 
power — the  power  to  issue  licenses  away  from  the  Mayor.  I  think  there  ought 
to  be  a  commission  appointed  to  issue  licenses,  and  every  saloonkeeper  ought 
to  submit  to  an  examination  as  to  whether  he  is  fit  to  run  a  saloon;  the  same 
thing  in  regard  to  revoking  licenses.  Now  I  may  run  a  square  saloon,  but  the 
policeman  on  the  beat  does  not  like  my  face,  and  if  I  run  a  minute  over  the 
closing  time  he  will  report  me,  and  my  property  or  my  money,  all  invested,  is 
taken  away  without  due  process  of  law.  I  cannot  bring  in  witnesses;  I  have  no 
chance  to  defend  myself.  All  I  can  do  is  to  bother  an  alderman  from  my  ward 
and  get  them  to  try  to  get  the  license  back,  but  there  is  no  trial.  If  a  man's 
license  is  revoked  he  should  have  a  trial  so  he  could  get  witnesses. 

I  would  have  both  the  issuing  of  licenses  and  the  revocation  of  a  license 
done  by  a  commission. 

In  this  way  we  would  soon  get  rid  of  the  objectionable  men  in  the  saloon 
business.  • 

The  features  that  make  a  saloon  a  bad  saloon  are:  the  first  thing  is  a 

..  saloonkeeper  wants  to  make  his  expenses  and  his  wages.     If  he  is  not  in  a 

'position  where  he  can  do  that  he  allows  his  customers  to  do  this  and  that.  The 

customers  may  gamble.     He  may  bring  girls  in.     They  may  use  indecent  Ian 

guage  just  to  hold  the  crowd,  the  customers  he  has.     I  had  a  conversation 

with  old  man  Harrison  regarding  this  matter.     He  says  "now  you  have  a 

saloon  and  a  couple  of  blocks  west  of  you  there  are  other  saloons  that  are  not 

desirable,  and  if  we  close  those  places  up  they  will  come  to  your  place  and 

53 


they  will  drive  away  your  good  customers.  If  you  have  a  bad  crowd  the  decent 
customers  that  you  have  will  stay  away."  He  says,  "a  certain  amount  of 
saloons  of  that  kind  should  exist  so  the  police  when  they  want  to  find  a  man 
they  can  get  him  right  away."  I  traveled  in  the  old  country  five  years  ago  and 
I  investigated  the  saloons  and  I  found  in  pretty  near  every  big  city  they  had 
certain  locations  where  the  questionable  crowds  hang  out  and  every  week,  once 
or  twice,  the  police  would  make  a  raid  and  pick  them  all  up;  maybe  not  all, 
but  some  of  them  were  dangerous  crooks,  and  they  arrested  them  and  found 
out  where  they  came  from  and  what  they  were  doing.  In  nearly  every  city  they 
have  such  a  place  as  that.  The  saloonkeeper  was  not  a  bad  saloonkeeper  but 
he  was  allowed  to  have  that  kind  of  a  place. 

Mr.   R.  L.  Hill. 
City  Supervisor,  Brotherhood  of  American  Yeomen. 

Those  engaged  in  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors,  as  well 
as  the  vast  horde  of  those  who  drink  to  excess,  are  prohibited  by  our  medical 
department  from  participating  in  the  benefits  of  life  insurance.  I  desire  to  sub- 
mit, for  your  consideration,  the  facts  as  gathered  by  Dr.  Chas.  P.  Smith,  of  Des 
Moines,  Iowa,  who  is  the  chief  medical  director  of  the  Brotherhood  of  American 
Yeomen,  a  beneficiary  insurance  organization,  with  headquarters  at  Des 
Moines,  Iowa. 

A  committee  composed  of  medical  directors  and  actuaries  of  a  number  of 
insurance  companies  are  working,  almost  continually,  making  investigations  as 
to  the  effect  of  occupations,  habits,  family  history,  height  and  weight  and,  in 
fact,  almost  all  matters  which  influence  life  insurance  risks.  On  consulting  this 
report  we  have  the  result  of  the  actual  experience  of  a  number  of  the  large 
insurance  companies  doing  business  in  this  country,  on  occupations  pertaining 
to  the  liquor  business.  Notwithstanding  the  fact  that  all  insurance  companies 
have  been  exceedingly  careful  in  the  selection  of  risks,  where  they  were  en- 
gaged in  any  branch  of  the  liquor  business,  or  where  there  was  a  history  in 
the  use  of  intoxicants,  this  experience  shows  conclusively  the  effect  of  intoxi- 
cants upon  the  mortality  rate  of  those  engaged  in  the  business.  The  principal 
reason  the  mortality  rate  is  increased  in  this  class  of  cases  is  the  fact  that 
they  are  addicted  to  the  excessive  use  of  liquors. 

On  page  12  of  this  report  we  find  under  the  group  "hotels  where  there  is  a 
bar,"  class  19.  This  class  includes  proprietors,  superintendents  and  managers, 
who  do  not  tend  bar.  In  the  entire  number  of  deaths  in  this  group  we  find  there 
were  529,  and  the  expected  deaths  under  the  American  Table  of  Mortality  were 
391.66;  in  other  words,  the  mortality  rate  was  135.  In  class  20,  including 
proprietors,  superintendents  and  managers,  who  tend  bar  occasionally  or  regu- 
larly, the  actual  deaths  in  this  class  were  519,  while  291.94  were  expected;  thus 
giving  a  mortality  rate  of  178.  In  class  20  of  this  group,  on  a  careful  examina- 
tion of  the  cause  of  death,  we  find  deaths  from  cirrhosis  of  the  liver,  six  times 
the  standard;  diabetes,  three  times  the  standard;  cerebral  hemorrhage,  or 
apoplexy,  nearly  twice  the  standard;  organic  disease  of  the  heart,  nearly  twice 
the  standard;  Bright's  disease,  nearly  three  times  the  standard,  and  pneumonia 
twice  the  standard.  In  class  19,  the  causes  of  death  compare  very  closely  to 
those  given  in  class  20.  Page  13  of  this  report,  includes  occupations  of  saloons, 
pool  halls,  and  bowling  alleys,  with  a  bar,  class  21.  In  this  group  of  occupa- 
tions, includes  proprietors  and  managers  who  do  not  tend  bar,  the  actual 
deaths  in  this  class  were  222;  the  expected  deaths  were  122.23.  In  other  words, 
there  was  a  mortality  rate  of  182  per  cent.  In  class  22  of  the  same  group  of 
occupations,  including  proprietors  and  managers  who  tend  bar  occasionally 
or  regularly,  there  were  830  actual  deaths  while  478.75  were  expected — giving 
a  mortality  rate  of  173.  On  the  same  page  we  find  breweries  listed  under  three 
classes.  In  class  23 — proprietors,  superintendents  and'  managers — there  were 
483  actual  deaths,  while  358.99  were  expected,  the  mortality  rate  being  135.  In 
class  24,  including  clerks  of  breweries,  there  were  112  actual  deaths,  while 
86.35  were  expected,  the  mortality  rate  being  130  in  this  class.  In  class  25,  in- 
cluding foremen,  malsters,  beer-pump  repairers  and  journeymen,  there  were 
145  actual  deaths,  while  but  95.13  were  expected,  or  a  mortality  rate  of  152. 
Among  proprietors,  etc.,  between  the  ages  of  15  and  29  years,  the  mortality  rate 
was  197.  Between  the  ages  of  30  and  49  years,  the  mortality  rate  was  133.  Of 
clerks  between  the  ages  of  15  and  29  years,  the  mortality  rate  was  only  90  per 
cent,  of  the  expected  and  between  30  and  49  years,  the  rate  was  176. 

96 


Let  us  take  Class  21 — "Proprietors  and  managers  of  a  saloon,  pool  hall  or 
bowling  alley  with  a  bar,  one  who  attends  bar."  Assume  that  the  man  be  30 
years  of  age,  engaged  in  one  of  the  above  named  occupations.  According  to 
the  actual  experience  of  the  insurance  company,  the  young  man  so  engaged, 
would  live  approximately  19.3  years.  If  he  engaged  in  an  ordinary  occupation, 
according  to  the  American  Table  of  Mortality,  he  should  live  35.33  years.  Thus 
it  will  be  seen  that  the  person  engaged  in  the  liquor  business,  as  above,  would 
be  giving  15.83  years  of  his  life  because  of  the  hazard  incident  to  his  occupa- 
tion. It  is  not  hard  to  understand  why  the  life  insurance  companies  should 
look  unfavorably  upon  risks  presenting  such  hazards. 

Mr.  George  F.  Lohman, 
Cashier,  City  Collector's  Office. 

The  bar  permits  from  May  11,  1912,  to  April  30,  1913,  issued  were  about 
5,249;  between  May  1,  1913,  and  April  30,  1914,  6,366;  May  1,  1914,  to  April  30, 
1915,  5,601;  from  May  1,  to  November  1,  1913,  2,884;  May  1,  1914,  to  November 
1,  1914,  2,849;  May  1,  1915,  to  November  1,  1915,  1,760.  The  new  bar  permit 
ordinance  was  passed -May  13,  1915,  and  as  a  result  1,100  less  permits  were 
issued.  Under  the  new  bar  permit  ordinance  it  is  necessary  to  file  your  appli- 
cation 15  days  ahead  and  they  must  make  their  application  in  duplicate.  You 
have  got  to  have  a  notary's  certificate  attached  to  it  and  a  lot  of  information 
that  we  did  not  get  under  the  old  application.  I  have  a  statement  here  of  the 
number  of  saloon  licenses  issued  since  1905,  going  back  to  the  time  when  the 
fee  was  $500  for  a  saloon  license,  the  year  1906  marking  the  beginning  of  the 
$1,000  license. 

The  first  license  period  is  from  November  1st  to  April  30th  and  the  second 
period  from  May  1st  to  November  1st. 

2nd  period,  1905 8097 

1st   period,  1906 7353 

2nd  period,  1906. 7237 

1st   period,  1907 7226 

2nd  period,  1907 7211 

1st   period,  1908 7180 

2nd  period,  1908 7154 

1st   period,  1909 7152 

2nd  period,  1909 7152 

1st   period,  1910 7152 

2nd  period,  1910 7152 

1st   period,  1911 7152 

2nd  period,  1911 7152 

1st    period,  1912 7152 

2nd  period,  1912 7152 

1st   period,  1913 7152 

2nd  period,  1913 7152 

1st   period,  1914 7152 

2nd  period,  1914 7152 

1st   period,  1915 7150 

The  city  collector  received  from  license  permits  alone  $8,628,663.91  during 
the  year  1914.  The  revenue  from  liquor  business  more  than  covers  the  cost  of 
maintaining  the  police  department;  the  last  named  department  being  the  most 
expensive  department  in  the  city. 

Mr.  Martin  McGraw. 
Executive   Board,    International   Union    of   the    United    Brewery    Workmen    of 

America. 

In  regard  to  the  employment  of  men  in  the  fifty-six  establishments  manu- 
facturing and  dealing  by  wholesale  in  beer,  located  in  the  City  of  Chicago,  our 
International  Organization,  composed  of  brewery  workers,  bottlers,  bottle  and 
keg  drivers,  and  malsters,  has  a  membership  of  about  4,800  men  employed  in 
the  city.  This  does  not  include  the  mechanical  departments  of  the  breweries,  or 
the  office  force,  or  the  men  engaged  on  the  erection  and  repair  work  of  build- 
ings and  machinery.  The  earning  capacity  of  these  men  at  the  present  time  is 
approximately  $5,670,000  per  year,  and  in  case  of  prohibition  being  adopted  by 

55 


the  City  of  Chicago,  these  men  will  be  idle,  as  it  is  impossible  for  anybody  to 
secure  employment  in  the  already  overcrowded  labor  market. 

All  of  the  inside  men  employed  in  the  breweries  have  taken  up  this  work 
as  their  trade  and  calling;,  and  have  spent  almost  a  lifetime  in  this  occupation, 
and  consequently,  to  a  great  extent,  are  unfitted  to  be  shifted  into  other  occu- 
pations. Those  who  could  find  employment  elsewhere,  would  naturally  have  to 
accept  the  same  under  greatly  reduced  wage  scales,  and  a  consequent  reducing 
of  the  standard  of  life. 

The  1,800  bottle  and  keg  drivers  would,  of  necessity,  depress  the  wages  of 
the  general  teamsters  of  Chicago  in  the  scramble  for  employment,  and  the 
chances  of  employment  in  every  other  trade  and  calling,  including  the  printing 
trade,  would  be  greatly  reduced. 

Estimating  the  number  of  men  directly  and  indirectly  affected  by  the 
closing  of  the  breweries  and  saloons,  I  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that  it  will 
affect  in  the  City  of  Chicago  more  than  150,000  men  in  their  present  employ- 
ment the  result  of  which  would  be  disastrous  to  labor,  without  a  question. 

Aside  from  the  men  directly  employed  in  the  liquor  industry,  every  line  of 
business,  manufacturing  and  mercantile,  has  suffered  with  the  establishment 
of  prohibition  in  the  various  states  which  have  adopted  the  same. 

*  In  the  States  of  Alabama  and  Tennessee  the  Union  Cigar  Makers  have 
had  to  leave  for  other  states  in  order  to  find  employment,  and  the  Cigar  Makers' 
Organization  is  as  completely  eliminated  as  the  men  employed  in  the  manufac- 
turing of  beer. 

Mr.  John   W.    Maskell. 

I  think  that  before  a  man  is  permitted  to  put  his  name  on  a  license  his 
character  should  be  investigated  and  have  the  approval  of  a  commission.  When 
it  comes  to  a  renewal  or  a  revocation  I  do  not  believe  that  any  commission 
or  any  public  officer  should  have  any  power  to  say  whether  or  not  a  man's 
license  should  be  revoked.  If  a  man  has  done  something  that  justifies  the  re- 
voking of  his  license  I  think  he  ought  to  be  tried  by  a  jury  and  his  property 
should  be  taken  from  him  in  a  court  of  law.  I  think  it  is  a  cause  of  political 
blackmail,  too  much  power.  For  instance,  a  license  can  be  revoked  if  a  man 
kept  open  one  minute  after  one  o'clock  and  sold  to  a  minor.  That  may  be  a 
technical  violation,  but  in  reality  the  spirit  of  the  law  has  not  been  broken, 
and  I  think  a  jury  of  men  should  give  a  decision. 

It  will  not  destroy  his  investment.  I  introduced  in  the  Legislature  at 
Springfield,  or  instructed  our  attorney  to  introduce  a  bill  providing  that  it  be 
made  a  felony  for  a  person  convicted  of  a  felony  or  a  minor  being  in  the 
saloon.  Today  an  immoral  woman  might  come  into  my  saloon  and  behave 
herself,  but  if  she  was  found  in  there  waiting  for  an  escort  to  come  in.  I  might 
be  charged  with  harboring  an  immoral  woman  and  have  my  license  revoked. 

I  introduced  this  bill  for  the  purpose  of  reversing  the  responsibility.  If 
a  minor  or  an  immoral  woman  were  there  they  were  at  their  peril. 
Let  the  man  running  the  police  district  be  responsible  for  a  man  being  in  my 
saloon,  and  let  the  patrolman  patrol  my  saloon  the  same  as  he  patrols  the 
beat  and  let  him  walk  in  the  front  door  and  out  of  the  back  door  every  time 
he  travels  his  beat.  The  city  council  should  have  the  right  to  determine 
whether  an  immoral  man  or  woman  or  a  person  convicted  of  a  felony  should 
have  the  right  to  run  a  saloon.  A  man  during  the  last  administration  had 
his  license  revoked  for  harboring  criminals.  He  could  have  had  his  license 
revoked  from  the  beginning,  as  far  as  that  goes,  for  harboring  criminals;  but 
the  same  thing  might  be  said  of  myself.  I  have  seen  my  bar  lined  with  men 
and  every  man  had  a  prison  record.  A  police  officer  might  come  in  and  say 
there  were  10  criminals  at  the  bar  and  say  "you  are  harboring  criminals." 
He  might  come  in  a  minute  later  and  not  find  a  single  one  there.  Instead  of 
making  the  saloonkeeper  responsible  for  the  character  of  men  and  women  who 
frequent  these  saloons,  let  the  police  department  be  made  responsible  for  the 
character  of  the  people  in  my  place  of  business. 

Substantially,  my  contention  is  that  there  should  be  some  responsibility 
in  the  police  department  as  to  the  character  of  people  found  in  any  place.  There 
skould  be  a  commission,  and  there  should  be  no  revocation  until  a  trial  by  a  jury 
for  that  purpose.  For  instance  suppose  I  am  open  on  Sunday  after  one  o'clock, 

56 


the  fine  is  ordinarily  $200;  my  money  is  invested  and  it  represents  $5,000.  Why 
should  my  license  be  abolished?  Licensing  bartenders  is  a  good  idea.  There 
are  men  behind  saloon  bars  in  Chicago  that  I  do  not  think  are  there  for  the 
purpose  of  selling  beer  at  all;  they  are  there  just  for  the  purpose  of  finding 
out  who  can  be  easily  robbed,  who  are  the  live  ones.  If  they  were  subjected 
to  some  kind  of  an  examination  by  an  examining  commission  that  would  have 
the  right  to  grant  a  license  it  would  probably  mean  that  a  lot  would  not  be 
employed. 

No  alderman  should  be  required  to  make  a  saloon  canvass;  I  think  it  is 
an  injustice.  If  he  makes  a  statement  of  his  position  as  to  how  he  stands  on 
the  liquor  question  it  ought  to  be  sufficient  and  he  should  not  be  expected  to 
make  a  canvass  any  more  than  he  would  be  expected  to  buy  drugs  from  a  drug 
store  or  dry  goods  from  a  dry  goods  store  or  clothing  from  a  clothing  house. 
The  saloonkeeper  is  greatly  harmed  by  the  sale  of  liquor  from  wagons.  We 
sent  a  communication  to  the  City  Council  two  months  ago  protesting  against 
the  non-enforcement  of  this  law,  by  pleading  the  injustice  being  done;  that  we 
are  forced  to  close  on  Sunday  and  wagons  are  allowed  to  go  around  the  neigh- 
borhood. The  law  ought  to  be  fair,  but  I  think  we  are  given  the  worst  of  it 
apparently.  You  take  the  drug  store,  I  suppose  every  drug  store  would  fight 
against  the  saloon.  They  find  Sunday  closing  has  increased  their  receipts  50 
per  cent. 

The  department  stores  and  drug  stores  that  sell  liquor  on  State  street  have 
a  saloon  license;  they  are  retail  saloons,  and  they  simply  run  a  dry  goods  store 
in  connection  with  the  saloon.  The  saloonkeepers  of  Chicago  have  no  kick  on 
the  department  stores  as  long  as  they  pay  a  license,  because  the  department 
stores  of  Chicago  have  not  done  anything  to  interfere  with  our  putting  in  a  line 
of  dry  goods  on  the  side,  if  we  want  to  put  it  in.  The  trouble  about  the 
sale  of  liquor  in  department  stores  and  drug  stores  has  been  recognized  by 
the  saloon  people,  because  it  gives  girls  and  women  an  opportunity  to  get 
liquor,  and  an  opportunity  to  drink  it,  without  the  odium  that  might  attach  to 
them  if  they  entered  the  side  door  of  a  saloon. 

In  regard  to  the  undesirables,  I  want  to  say  that  at  the  convention  at  Spring- 
field was  passed  a  resolution  petitioning  the  Legislature  of  Illinois  to  pass  a  law 
making  it  unlawful  for  a  person  convicted  of  immorality,  a  person  convicted 
of  a  felony,  a  person  who  is  a  minor,  or  a  person  who  had  been  adjudged  a 
drunkard,  to  be  found  in  a  place  where  liquor  was  sold.  That  would  eliminate 
the  habitual  drunkards,  the  minors,  and  other  undesirables,  and  would  invest 
a  policeman  with  the  power  to  put  a  person  of  that  kind  under  arrest  if  he 
found  them  in  a  saloon,  and  there  would  be  no  necessity  for  any  other  charge 
being  put  against  them;  and  it  would  make  the  regulation  of  a  saloon  charge- 
able to  the  police  captain  in  the  district,  instead  of  having  to  bring  the  saloon- 
keeper in  on  the  charge  of  running  a  bum  saloon.  Instead  of  bringing  the 
saloonkeeper  in,  you  would  bring  the  captain  in  for  permitting  a  bum  saloon  to 
be  conducted  in  his  district. 

The  bartenders'  union  had  three  scales  of  wages.  The  scales  that  they  ask 
are  $15.00  for  bartenders  who  are  employed  in  saloons  where  no  drinks  are 
mixed  at  all,  but  where  they  simply  draw  a  glass  of  beer  or  serve  whiskey. 
In  saloons  where  the  customers  occasionally  call  for  mixed  drinks,  the  wages  are 
$18.00  a  week.  In  buffets,  which  would  be  the  downtown  saloons,  where  prob- 
ably seven  or  eight  out  of  every  ten  drinks  are  mixed  drinks  of  some  kind, 
where  the  work  would  really  require  a  professional  bartender,  the  union  scale 
is  $20.00,  with  the  understanding  that  more  is  to  be  paid  to  the  man  if  he  is 
worth  it,  and  as  a  rule  it  is  more  than  $20.00.  As  to  income,  I  want  to  say 
that  in  my  estimation  the  income  of  the  average  saloon  is  about  $1,000  a 
month.  That  would  be  about  $30.00  a  day,  because  $3Q.OO  a  day  makes  about 
$1,000  a  month.  With  7,000  saloons,  that  would  be  $7,000,000  a  month,  and  12 
months  in  a  year  would  make  it  $84,000,000;  so  that  if  the  workingmen  spend 
50  per  cent,  of  that,  $42,000,000  a  year  would  be  spent  in  the  saloons. 

Mr.  Theodore  Oehne. 

It  is  fair  to  assume  that  the  purpose  of  all  prohibition  agitation  is  to 
ultimately  eliminate  the  consumption  of  alcoholic  beverages.  Will  this  be 
accomplished  in  Chicago  by  banishing  the  saloon  and  by  forbidding  the  manu- 

57 


facture  and  sale  of  so-called  intoxicants  here?  I  dare  say  that  even  the  most 
earnest  advocate  of  prohibition  will  not  be  sanguine  enough  to  claim  any  such 
result.  What  then  is  the  purpose  of  this  agitation?  The  assertion  that  prohibi- 
tion decreases  crime  is  simply  an  assertion  and  in  no  instance  substantiated  by 
facts. 

The  assertion  that  prohibition  decreases  insanity  is  simply  an  assertion  and 
in  no  instance  substantiated  by  facts.  The  assertion  that  prohibition  increases 
the  wealth  of  the  people  is  simply  an  assertion  and  in  no  instance  substantiated 
by  facts.  No  sane  well  informed  person  will  claim  that  Maine,  Kansas,  Georgia, 
Tennessee,  Oklahoma  or  Mississippi  are  among  the  wealthiest  states,  nor  that 
they  favorably  compare  with  other  states  in  reference  to  crime  or  insanity. 
What  prohibition  laws  will  do  is  to  eliminate  a  large  amount  of  revenue  now 
paid  to  the  government,  state,  city,  town  and  school  district.  It  will  confiscate 
a  large  amount  of  property  without  compensation,  property  legitimately  acquired 
and  held  under  and  by  virtue  of  existing  laws.  It  will  deprive  a  large  number  of 
people  of  their  occupation  and  their  means  of  existence  notwithstanding  that 
the  pursuance  of  such  occupation  and  such  existence  has  been  guaranteed  to 
them  by  now  existing  laws. 

Prohibition  will  transform  every  drug  store  which  may  sell  alcohol  for 
medical  purposes,  and  every  paint  shop  which  may  sell  alcohol  to  be  used  in 
art,  into  a  liquor  distributing  agency.  The  following  facts  will  confirm  this 
statement.  Take,  for  instance,  right  here  in  Chicago  today  the  district  bounded 
by  State  street,  39th  street,  Lake  Michigan  and  63rd  street,  which  district  is 
almost  exclusively  prohibition.  This  district  comprises  one-fortieth  of  Chicago's 
total  territory  and  contains  within  its  boundary  one-tenth  of  Chicago's  total 
number  of  drug  stores.  These  facts  involuntarily  raise  in  our  mind  the  question 
— is  the  health  of  the  inhabitants  of  a  prohibition  district  so  far  below  the  health 
of  the  average  people  of  Chicago  to  make  this  abnormal  number  of  drug 
stores  a  necessity,  which  under  normal  conditions  could  not  eke  out  an 
existence,  or  have  these  stores  other  means  of  making  a  livelihood.  With 
very  little  trouble  you  could  ascertain  that  in  this  very  district  today  are  drug 
stores  which  maintain  a  distinct  liquor  department  and  some  of  them  sell 
monthly  from  four  to  five  barrels  of  whiskey  besides  all  other  malt  tonics  and 
bottled  beer. 

While  it  might  appear  on  the  surface  in  small  rural  communities  that 
prohibition  laws  could  be  successfully  enforced  this  would  be  utterly  impossible 
in  Chicago,  a  cosmopolitan  city  of  two  and  one-half  million  of  inhabitants, 
provided  the  enforcement  of  prohibition  does  mean  more  than  simply 
the  banishment  of  the  saloon,  but  means  as  it  is  claimed  by  its  advocates 
the  extermination  of  the  use  of  alcoholic  beverages.  The  passing  of  prohibition 
laws  is  class  legislation  pure  and  simple.  These  laws  will  not  apply  to  the 
wealthy  who  can  afford  to  either  keep  a  cellar  well  stocked  with  intoxicants  or 
maintain  a  membership  in  some  club.  While  these  laws  cannot  be  made 
applicable  to  the  rich  they  will  be  applied  to  the  poorer  classes,  such  as  small 
shop  keepers,  clerks,  mechanics  and  workingmen  and  will  deprive  them  of 
privileges  which  the  rich  continue  to  exercise.  I  even  claim  that  the  wealthier 
classes  under  the  pretense  of  morality  favor  prohibition  not  for  the  sake  of 
prohibition,  but  for  the  purpose  of  enabling  them  not  only  to  control  the  working 
hours  of  the  wage  worker  which  they  do  now,  but  also  to  control  his  hours  of 
rest  and  recreation. 

Another  effect  of  prohibition  will  be  to  throw  the  traffic  in  alcoholic 
beverages  which  now  is  controlled  and  regulated  wide  open.  It  will  not  only 
cause  the  springing  up  of  so-called  blind  pigs  all  over  the  city,  but  it  will 
establish  a  clandestine  traffic  in  liquor  under  all  conceivable  disguises.  The 
effect  of  prohibition  will  even  go  further.  As  science  has  taught  us  that  alcohol 
can  be  manufactured  at  a  nominal  cost  and  by  the  use  of  very  primitive  ap- 
pliances— such  as  a  tin  kettle  and  a  rubber  hose — so-called  moonshining  would 
attain  alarming  proportion.  The  poorer  classes  would  commence  to  make  their 
own  raw  spirits  contaminated  with  fusel  oil  for  immediate  consumption,  not 
being  able  to  obtain  aged,  matured  whiskey  as  they  do  now,  and  prohibition 
thereby  would  become  a  curse  to  the  city  and  its  population.  Do  we  need 
prohibition  laws?  It  has  always  been  a  rather  risky  proceeding  to  try  and 
regulate  people's  habits,  not  criminal  in  themselves,  by  law.  A  man  who  has 

58 


self  control,  and  I  claim  nine-tenths  of  our  citizens  have  that,  will  resent  any 
such  interferences  with  his  personal  habits  and  preferences. 

It  appears  absurd  to  every  self-respecting  man  that  on  account  of  a  few 
degenerates  the  habits  of  millions  should  be  interfered  with  by  law  and  they 
should  be  held  up  as  criminals  because  somebody  does  not  like  their  way  of 
living.  Punish  a  man  that  is  found  intoxicated  the  same  as  you  punish  anybody 
that  is  guilty  of  transgressing  the  laws.  You  today  justly  punish  a  murderer, 
but  you  would  call  it  absurd  if  you  should  be  asked  to  punish  for  the  crime  of 
murder  the  person  who  sold  to  the  murderer  the  weapon  with  which  the  crime 
was  committed  or  the  person  who  manufactured  this  weapon.  Instead  of 
opening  the  doors  wide  to  a  promiscuous  traffic  in  alcoholic  beverages  or  take 
chances  in  having  thousands  produce  their  own  raw  spirits,  the  inevitable 
results  of  prohibition  legislation  in  Chicago,  keep  control  of  the  manufacture 
and  sale  of  liquor  and  regulate  it  in  such  a  manner  that  the  decent  law-abiding 
saloon  keeper  who  conducts  his  place  in  a  proper  manner  is  protected,  and 
weed  out  those  saloon  keepers  who  continuously  come  in  conflict  with  the  laws 
and  spurn  all  demands  to  conduct  their  places  properly  and  decently. 

You  ask  me  the  first  question,  do  you  know  the  revenue  the  Chicago  saloons 
will  produce?  I  will  give  you  data  upon  one  place  I  am  familiar  with,  that  is 
the  corner  of  39th  and  Cottage  Grove  avenue,  the  Drexel.  The  Drexel  pays 
$2,039.34  taxes  yearly;  it  pays  $362.12  personal  property  taxes;  it  pays  $764.44 
water  taxes;  it  pays  $750  insurance  and  $8,220  rent.  All  of  that  would  not  be 
wiped  out  if  the  place  was  closed,  because  the  premises  could  possibly  be 
used  for  some  other  purpose,  but  more  than  60  per  cent,  of  these  figures  would 
be  wiped  out.  Then  they  further  pay  to  the  City  their  saloon  license  of  $1,000; 
cigarette  license  $100.00;  billiard  license  $40.00;  bowling  alley  license  $30.00; 
amusement  license  $25.00;  restaurant  license  $15.00;  rental  for  canopy  space 
over  sidewalk  $25.00;  roof  sign  inspection  $50.00;  sign  inspection  $10.00;  boiler 
inspection  $8.00;  canopy  inspection  $5.00;  elevator  inspection  $2.00;  hall 
inspection  $2.00  and  electric  inspection  $20.00,  making  a  total  of  $1,332.00. 
Furthermore,  this  place  makes  its  own  electric  light  and  employs  a  number  of 
regular  employes,  to  whom  they  pay  $60.00,  and  a  number  of  extra  employes, 
two  days  a  week,  to  whom  they  pay  $20.00,  making  $80.00.  They  pay  a  total 
amount  of  wages  per  year  of  $5,523.  These  things  would  be  wiped  out.  This  is 
only  one  place  out  of  7,150.  Of  course  in  these  wages  I  include  engineers' 
wages,  the  men  that  run  the  engines.  In  my  judgment,  it  may  be  true  that  in 
some  few  locations  the  elimination  of  a  saloon  might  be  beneficial  to  the  sur- 
rounding property,  perhaps  in  residence  districts,  but  in  a  large  majority  of 
the  locations  it  certainly  would  not  be,  and  if  I  am  correctly  informed,  today 
pretty  near  four-sevenths  of  the  territory  of  the  city  is  prohibition. 

That  part  of  it  is  certainly  protected  against  saloon,  if  you  want  to  say 
so,  but  my  judgment  is  that — of  course  I  have  been  connected  with  a  brewery 
for  many  years,  about  30  years,  these  institutions  consume  a  lot  of  material  and 
employ  a  lot  of  labor  and  own  a  large  amount  of  real  estate,  machinery,  coal,  and 
everything,  which  naturally  would  be  wiped  out.  How  you  want  to  replace 
that  is  a  mystery  to  me.  In  my  judgment  the  prohibition  of  liquor,  or  you 
may  say  a  Dry  Chicago,  while  it  may  elminate  a  few  things  that  ought  to  be 
eliminated,  will  create  conditions  which  we  cannot  realize  now.  It  is  a  fact, 
that  liquor  today  can  be  produced  at  a  very  small  expense  and  with  very  little 
paraphernalia.  You  cannot  change  a  man's  nature  by  law,  and  if  a  man  is 
used  to  using  intoxicants,  I  always  speak  in  moderation,  a  law  will  not  change 
his  nature  or  habits;  he  will  try  to  get  it,  if  he  cannot  get  it  one  way  he  will 
try  and  get  it  another  way.  The  question  is  whether  this  clandestine  way  may 
not  be  a  good  deal  worse  than  the  way  he  can  get  it  now  tinder  proper 
restrictions  and  regulations. 

I  believe  in  a  strictly  regulated  and  conducted  saloon.  Of  course  there  are 
today  features  connected  with  some  saloons  which  should  not  exist,  which 
should  be  eliminated,  but  the  authorities  can  do  that  if  they  want  to;  they  have 
the  power.  You  see  the  city  authorities  and  the  mayor  have  absolute  power. 
The  mayor  can  close  a  saloon  or  let  it  run,  or  do  as  he  pleases.  He  has  the 
power  to  regulate  that. 

I  have  had  the  question  of  objectionable  saloons  up  with  the  former  mayor, 
Mr.  Harrison,  and  we  both  agreed  that  about  10  per  cent,  of  them  were  objec- 

59 


tionable— about  700  or  800.  You  take  a  large  number  of  the  outlying  saloons, 
where  a  man  and  a  woman  attend  to  the  business,  the  woman  scrubs  up  the 
place;  she  cooks  the  lunch;  she  serves  while  the  men  are  eating;  there  are  no 
objections  to  these  saloons.  There  is  no  crime  committed  in  these  saloons. 

I  think  gambling  should  be  eliminated  from  saloons,  and  by  gambling  I  do 
not  mean  that  a  party  sitting  down  and  playing  penochle  or  66  for  a  glass  of 
beer,  is  gambling,  but  a  saloon  that  provides  for  taking  bets  on  horse  races 
should  be  cut  out.  I  do  not  think,  for  instance,  the  so-called  cabaret  business, 
which  has  of  late  been  widespread,  should  be  permitted  in  saloons.  You  find 
places,  say  a  saloon  25  by  50  with  a  cabaret  show.  That  cabaret  show  costs 
money;  it  is  expensive,  and  to  be  carried  on  in  a  legitimate  way  the  place 
must  have  space  enough  to  accommodate  enough  people  to  make  the  thing 
pay,  and  where  they  cannot  do  it  in  a  legitimate  way  I  cannot  see  how  they  can 
exist  in  a  legitimate  way. 

The  objectionable  saloons  are  those  catering  to  thieves,  acting  as  a  fence 
for  thieves  and  where  the  lawless  element  congregates. 

It  has  been  demonstrated  in  other  parts  of  the  country,  that  prohibition 
will  increase  the  consumption  of  ardent  spirits.  It  will  diminish  the  consump- 
tion of  beer  and  it  will  diminish  the  consumption  of  still  wine,  but  it  will  increase 
the  consumption  of  ardent  spirits,  becatise  they  are  easier  transported.  You 
can  have  a  bottle  in  your  pocket  you  know,  and  it  does  not  have  to  be  cold, 
while  beer  must  be  cold;  you  must  have  facilities  to  make  it  cold,  and  ardent 
spirits  are  easier  shipped. 

Ninety-five  per  cent,  of  the  outlying  saloons  serve  in  the  capacity  of  a 
"poor  man's  club."  A  man  is  working  all  the  week  around:  lives  in  cramped 
quarters,  and  on  a  Sunday  meets  his  friends  in  the  only  place  where  he  can 
meet  them.  He  has  no  club  at  his  disposal  where  he  can  go  and  play  billiards 
or  ten  pins,  but  he  goes  to  a  saloon,  and  probably  takes  a  glass  of  beer  and 
plays  cards  and  goes  home.  In  95  per  cent,  of  the  outlying  saloons  that  is  the 
modus  operandi. 

Each  brewery  has  its  proportionate  share  of  objectionable  saloons.  I  do 
not  think  there  is  any  particular  brewery  that  caters  to  that  class  of  trade. 

If  a  saloon  license  is  controlled  by  a  brewery,  which  is  more  or  less  of  a 
tangible  thing  to  reach,  they  are  more  careful,  I  should  judge,  at  least  I  know 
it  used  to  be,  to  whom  they  gave  such  a  license,  just  for  fear  of  losing  it,  while 
an  individual  that  owned  a  license  and  he  gets  in  bad,  don't  care. 

A  brewery  does  not  want  anything  else  than  any  other  wholesale  house 
wants.  If  it  furnished  certain  accommodations  to  a  man  it  wants  a  man  to 
pay  for  that,  and  that  is  all  they  expect  a  man  to  do.  If  he  does  what  he 
should  do  he  has  got  clear  sailing,  but  if  he  does  not  they  do  like  anybody  else 
does. 

If  a  man  owns  his  own  lease,  owns  his  fixtures  and  pays  for  his  own  license 
he  is  expected  to  pay  to  the  brewery  the  price  of  the  beer.  If  the  brewery 
advances  the  license  and  other  things,  instead  of  paying  a  regular  price  for 
the  beer  he  has  to  pay  so  much  more  per  barrel  and  that  additional  is  credited 
against  his  indebtedness.  He  does  not  pay  that  as  an  additional  price,  but  he 
pays  that  in  order  to  pay  off  that  indebtedness  to  the  brewery. 

In  the  case  of  the  brewery  owned  license  the  saloons  are  operated  not  by  the 
breweries,  but  by  an  individual,  and  the  license  reads  in  the  name  of  the  man 
who  operates  the  saloon. 

The  brewery  receives  a  reassignment  of  the  license,  at  least  that  was  the 
custom  years  ago,  which  is  filed  with  the  City  Collector,  and  any  renewal  of 
that  license  can  only  be  given  to  the  man  that  license  is  reassigned  to, 
unless  it  is  again  reassigned  to  the  man  that  had  it.  In  other  words,  if  a 
license  term  expires  and  he  wants  a  renewal  he  has  to  go  to  the  brewer  and 
get  a  reassignment,  of  the  license  and  the  City  Collector  is  notified  to  that 
effect. 

If  I  want  to  start  a  saloon,  for  instance,  today,  and  I  have  not  any  license 
I  can  go  to  a  brewer  and  say  "Can  you  accommodate  me  with  a  license,"  and 
they  say  "Yes."  I  make  application  for  that  license  and  the  police  have  to 
investigate  my  record  just  the  same  as  that  of  anybody  else,  whether  the  license 
is  secured  by  the  brewer,  because  the  license  has  to  be  issued  in  my  name. 
The  real  ownership  of.the  license  does  not  make  any  difference,  because  that 

60 


is  simply  a  matter  of  trade.  This  man  wants  a  license  and  the  brewer  has  one, 
and  he  probably  is  not  able  to  pay  for  it.  The  brewery  advances  him  the  money, 
but  the  man  himself  who  wants  it  is  investigated  by  the  police,  and  if  the 
police  find  that  the  man  is  not  a  proper  person  to  have  a  license  it  is  not  issued. 

If  a  brewery  fits  out  a  man  with  a  saloon  license  the  first  thing  they  do 
is  to  take  a  chattel  mortgage  upon  the  fixtures  of  that  man,  and  they  take  an 
assignment  of  the  license  from  this  man.  He  obligates  himself  to  the  brewery 
to  pay  a  certain  amount  of  money  which  is  to  cover  the  beer  and  the  license, 
and  if  he  wants  to  of  the  fixtures.  As  long  as  he  does  that,  you  know,  as  long 
as  he  does  business  enough  to  enable  him  to  do  that  there  is  no  trouble  and  if 
he  cannot  then  the  brewery  takes  hold  of  the  place  naturally. 

Of  course  it  might  sound  a  little  bit  self-lauding,  but  I  will  say  that  while  I 
was  with  the  Seipp  Brewing  Company  I  never  sold  to  a  place  that  I  did  not  think 
was  right,  and  I  never  in  my  life  went  to  the  City  Hall  and  asked  for  the 
restoration  of  a  revoked  license,  never. 

Mr.  Horace  Secrist. 
Department  of  Economics, 
Northwestern  University. 

I  might  say  that  the  loss  of  city  revenue  from  this  source  would  be  so 
inconsiderable,  as  compared  with  the  enormous  gains — direct  and  indirect — 
to  be  realized  by  a  sober,  law-abiding  people,  that  to  my  mind  its  presents 
scarcely  a  problem.  I  have  no  sympathy  with  the  view  which  maintains  that 
the  disadvantages  associated  with  an  economic  adjustment  as  a  result  of  in- 
stalling prohibition  are  so  serious  that  we  must  tolerate  present  conditions 
because  of  them.  From  the  standpoint  of  business  organization — the  principles 
of  which  are  clearly  applicable  to  public  affairs  a  city's  trading  upon  the  weak- 
nesses and  depravity  of  its  people  is  so  inconsistent  with  the  development  of 
approved  standard  in  modern  enterprise  that  there  is  absolutely  no  case  for 
its  toleration.  It  seems  to  me  inconsistent  for  a  modern  state  or  city  to 
acknowledge  a  vested  right  in  the  conditions  of  a  thing  which  even  the  most 
short-sighted  can  see  is  inexcusably  bad  for  the  group  as  a  whole. 

Parasitism  is  never  to  be  condoned  even  though  its  uprooting  would  tem- 
porarily occasion  a  rather  serious  readjustment.  If  the  end  is  legitimate  the 
means  to  that  end  are  likewise  legitimate,  if  carried  out  with  due  consideration 
of  all  the  interests  involved. 

So  far  as  other  revenue  to  displace  .those  arising  now  from  the  liquor 
business  are  concerned,  there  are  any  number  of  sources  which  could  be 
tapped,  and  with  propriety,  to  more  than  compensate  for  the  losses  involved. 
The  problem  in  all  its  aspects  reduces  itself  to  one  of  public  courage.  Whether 
the  liquor  traffic  will  go,  and  with  it  the  revenues  now  accruing  to  the  city, 
will  depend  upon  the  expressed  wish  of  the  electorate.  The  disturbing  thing 
to  one  who  desires  this  wish  to  be  forcibly  expressed  is  that  the  electorate  are 
so  unresponsive  to  the  demands  of  the  time  and  are  so  poorly  organized  that 
their  best  wishes  are  easily  frustrated  and  their  minds  confused  by  an  appeal 
to  such  a  flimsy  thing  as  the  loss  of  some  city  revenue,  the  fear  of  unemploy- 
ment, etc.  Experience  has  proved,  however,  that  the  people  are  coming  to  see 
the  problem  in  all  its  aspects  and  to  dismiss  the  minor  and  inconsequential 
consideration  for  those  which  are  of  real  value.  If  your  commission  can  do 
something  to  clarify  the  issue  and  to  put  the  larger  aspects  of  this  problem 
in  their  true  light  and  to  reduce  to  their  proper  place  such  immediate  and  in- 
consequential items  as  the  ones  which  you  enumerate  in  your  questionnaire,  it 
will  have  served  a  real  purpose. 

Mr.  John  A.  Shields. 
Prohibition  National  Committee. 

In  your  questionnaire,  you  say,  "It  has  been  stated  that  the  breweries  and 
saloons  give  direct  employment  here  to  36,070  persons.  Can  you  state  whether 
this  number  is  approximately  correct?"  I  am  willing  to  assume  that  it  is 
correct,  although  I  think  it  is  a  little  bit  high,  for  the  reason  that  you  will 
find  in  the  United  States  Statistical  Abstract,  that  there  were  in  the  City  of 
Chicago  in  1910  5,489  male  bartenders;  57  female  bartenders;  5,652  male 
saloon  keepers,  and  129  female  saloon  keepers.  We  looked  to  see  how  much 

61 


taxes  the  saloons  of  Chicago  paid  and  we  find  that  they  pay  all  the  way  from 
50  cents  to  $7.00  taxes  in   the  city.     The  average   saloon  keeper   paid   $3.57 
taxes.     If  \ve  would  follow  that  up  we  would  find  conditions  regarding  taxes 
like  the  conditions  here.    I  am  willing  to  assume,  of  course,  that  36,070  is  right. 
The  next  question  states  that  the  payroll  is  $33,133,760.    That  is  the  thing 
that  I  want  to  get  at.    I  find  in  another  place  that  the  rent  is  $11,724,000;  and 
that  the  saloons  of  this  town  paid  $42,000,000  into  other  lines  of  business,  and 
we  find  that  the  licenses  amounted  to  something  over  $7,000,000.     We  have  a 
total  expense  here  of  something  over  $94,000,000.     Now  that  does  not  account 
for  any  profit  at  all.    They  would  have  to  sell  $94,000,000  worth  of  liquor  then 
in  order  to  get  the  money  to  pay  for  these  things — to  pay  the  payroll  and  the 
rent  and  for  these  other  things.    It  is  reasonable  that  the  liquor  business  turns 
its  goods  over  three  times  a  year.    I  presume  it  would  be  quite  reasonable  that 
they  do  so  three  times  a  week.     If  we  assume  that  they  turn  the  stock  over 
three  times  a  year  and  earn  10  per  cent,  each  time  they  would  have  made  then 
30  per  cent,  profit.     There  would  have  to  be  a  sale  of  $300,000,000  worth  of 
liquor  in  this  city  annually  in  order  to  give  enough  profit  to  cover  the  overhead, 
over  the  cost  of  the  liquor.    It  would  have  to  be  that  if  we  allowed  only  30  per 
cent,  in  order  to  make  a  sufficient  profit  to  pay  the  total  expenses  that  we  have 
found.     I  am  trying  to  get  at,  how  much  is  expended  for  liquor  in  Chicago. 
It  is  reasonable  to  assume  that  it  is  something  like  $300,000,000,  and  I  assume 
that  from  no  standpoint  of  profit.     Professor  Irving  Fisher  of  Yale,  says  that 
the  total  liquor  bill  of  the  country  is  $4,000,000,000,  and  Chicago's  share  would  be 
about  $400,000,000.     The  prohibitionist  who  wants  to  be  conservative  upon  the 
thing — says  it  will  be  nearer  $2,500,000,000.     At  the  rate  of  $2,500,000,000  Chi- 
cago's share  would  be  in  the  neighborhood  of  $300,000,000,  and  it  would  have 
to  be  that  to  give  you  this  overhead  and  a  little  profit.    Every  bit  of  revenue,  no 
matter  through  what  source  it  is  collected,  has  to  come  ultimately  out  of  the 
pockets  of  the  people — whether  it  is  in  the  form  of  taxes,  whether  in  the  form 
of  licenses  or  special  taxes,  it  has  to  come  out  of  the  pocket  ultimately  of  the 
consumer.     Now  if  the  people  of  this  city  expend  $300,000,000  for  liquor,  and 
that  is  a  conservative  estimate,  and  this  city  gets  $7,000,000  licenses  out  of  it, 
that  means  that  the  people  of  this  town  pay  a  commission  of  97%   per  cent, 
for  the  collection  of  this  revenue.     There  was  a  time  2,000  years  ago  when 
taxes  were  farmed  out.    That  is  the  way  Cicero  used  to  do  it.    He  used  to  allow 
a  man  up  in  Gaul  that  would  pay  him  the  most  money  to  take  over  the  taxes 
of  a  town  and  collect  what  he  could.     So  far  as  this  $7,000,000  is  concerned 
from  the  saloon  keepers  out  of  every  $100  th'at  comes  out  of  the  pockets  of  the 
people  then  by  a  simple  process  of  division  we  find  that  97%  per  cent,  of  it  is 
paid  out  in  overhead  and  2.33  goes  into  the  treasury  of  the  city.     That  would 
be  a  poor  form  of  revenue  at  the  very  best.    The  prohibitionist  approaches  the 
question   from   the   standpoint  that  the   saloon   is  not   a  producer   of  wealth. 
From  the  standpoint  of  a  producer  of  wealth,  from  an  economic  standpoint,  it 
does  not  give  a  man  any  return  for  his  money — anything  that  makes  him  a 
better  citizen  or  a  better  man  or  a  more  valuable  member  of  the  community,  or  a 
better  husband  or  father.    It  does  not  make  him  a  better  producer;  it  does  not 
make  him  a  better  economic  factor.    The  whole  liquor  business  is  not  a  wealth 
producer,  but  a  waste  producer  from  the  economic  standpoint.    From  this  stand- 
point the  liquor  traffic  is  simply  robbery  and  it  is  worse  than  robbery  from  an 
economic  standpoint.     I  am  speaking  from  that  standpoint.     A  man  spends  a 
dollar  in  a  saloon  and  he  not  only  gets  nothing,  economically  speaking,  for  his 
dollar,  but  he  is  less  able  to  earn  another  dollar  because  he  spent  his  dollar 
there. 

If  $300,000,000  is  spent  over  the  counter  of  the  saloons  in  Chicago  in  a 
year,  it  would  be  better,  estimated  from  an  economical  standpoint,  if  we  would 
just  take  these  $300,000,000  and  take  that  money  out  of  their  pockets  and  give 
them  nothing  in  return  for  it.  The  town  would  be  better  off  and  they  would 
be  better  off,  and  they  would  be  better  citizens,  because  if  they  got  no  return 
for  their  money  it  does  not  make  them  any  better.  Now  you  see  from  that 
standpoint  out  of  the  $300,000,000  this  city  is  getting  $7,000,000.  For  every 
$100  expended  in  the  saloons  the  saloon  keeper  gets  $97-%  and  the  city  gets 
$2.33  and  they  are  no  better  off.  Where  does  that  money  come  from,  the 
two-thirds?  I  will  quote  from  Mr.  Fisher  again.  He  says  that  75  per  cent. 

II 


of  that  money  comes  from  the  pockets  of  the  man  who  is  least  able  to  afford  it. 
If  we  could  get  this  $300,000,000  from  the  man  who  is  able  to  afford  it  it  would 
not  be  a  big  economic  factor,  but  the  professor  says  75  per  cent,  comes  from 
people  least  able  to  afford  it.  We  can  assume  that  a  large  percentage  of  it 
comes  from  poor  people.  If  we  would  hold  up  these  working  people  and  take 
this  $7,000,000  out  of  their  pockets  they  would  be  saving  several  millions  of 
dollars.  It  would  be  better  for  these  men  and  better  for  this  community  and 
better  for  us  from  an  economic  standpoint,  if  we  would  take  that  $300,000,000  and 
pound  it  into  a  rathole  or  take  it  out  into  the  middle  of  the  Atlantic  and  drop 
it  off,  because  they  would  not  get  anything  in  return  for  it;  they  would  do  no 
injury  economically  it  would  not  hurt  anybody  economically.  The  city  could 
better  afford  to  pay  the  saloon  keeper  the  $7,000,000  rather  than  to  permit  them 
to  make  a  profit  in  the  way  they  do  and  do  damage  to  the  community  the  way 
they  do.  I  am  trying  to  show  that  the  saloon  business  is  a  bad  means  of 
collecting  revenue. 

A  business  man  came  to  me  in  the  City  of  New  York  a  short  time  ago.  He 
said  "I  am  against  prohibition  because  I  think  the  saloons  are  a  good  thing 
for  the  town;  I  would  let  them  alone."  I  said  "Are  they?"  I  then  told  him  this 
little  story.  I  met  a  man  a  little  while  ago  walking  down  the  street  In  an 
intoxicated  condition.  He  had  on  a  tattered  coat  and  I  said  to  myself,  "The 
man's  clothing  business  is  suffering  because  that  man  is  drunk."  His  hat  was 
stove  in,  and  I  said  to  myself  "the  hat  business  is  suffering  because  that  man 
is  drunk."  He  had  on  a  dirty  collar  and  I  said  to  myself  "the  laundry  business  is 
suffering  on  account  of  that  man  being  drunk."  He  had  holes  in  his  socks,  and 
in  looking  over  that  man  I  could  see  that  almost  every  line  of  industry  in  this 
country  was  suffering  because  that  man  was  in  an  intoxicated  condition.  If 
I  had  followed  that  man  home  I  probably  would  have  found  on  looking  Into  his 
pantry  that  the  grocery  business  was  suffering  because  of  his  being  drunk,  and 
if  I  had  looked  around  his  premises  I  might  have  found  that  the  carpenter 
business  was  suffering  on  account  of  his  being  drunk,  and  practically  every 
line  of  industry  you  might  mention  was  suffering  on  that  account. 

We  come  to  the  proposition  that  prohibition  will  put  $300,000,000  now 
spent  for  liquor  in  the  saloons  into  useful  industries. 

Saloon  revenue  should  be  judged,  not  by  the  amount  of  money  returned  to 
the  city  treasury  or  by  what  that  money  does,  under  present  circumstances, 
in  providing  for  city  expenses,  but  by  the  effect  produced  upon  the  people  by 
the  collection  of  that  revenue.  Chicago  gets  substantially  $7,000,000  per  year 
from  the  liquor  business.  Leaving  out  of  sight  the  production  of  crime,  mental 
and  physical  disease  and  pauperism  which,  to  the  knowledge  of  all  men,  must 
be  charged  against  the  liquor  business,  there  stands  the  fact  that  the  liquor 
business  takes  from  the  people  of  Chicago,  in  order  to  be  able  to  pay  that 
revenue,  not  less  than  $70,000,000  every  year.  In  other  words,  in  taking  revenue 
from  the  liquor  business,  Chicago  is  employing  a  tax  collector  who  is  charging 
900  per  cent,  for  collecting  the  revenue. 

Chicago  has  assessed  taxable  property  in  excess  of  $950,000,000  and  probably 
at  least  half  as  much  more  property  that  ought  to  be  assessed  for  taxation  that 
escapes  assessment.  A  tax  rate  of  7.4  mills  upon  the  property  actually  assessed 
would  pay  the  revenue  now  paid  by  the  saloon,  whereas  the  people  now  pay  out, 
through  the  traffic  as  collector,  what  amounts  to  74  mills  upon  every  dollar  of 
the  city's  assessed  property  every  year.  But  that  fact  is  heaven-high  above  the 
comprehension  of  license  advocates  who  are  willing  to  go  on  in  their  present 
folly  of  letting  the  liquor  traffic  steal  97.66  every  time  it  turns  2.33  into  the 
public  treasury. 

The  value  of  the  total  output  of  agricultural  implements  is  $146,329,000; 
the  raw  material  cost  $60,307,000,  which  is  41.21  per  cent,  of  the  value  of  the 
manufactured  articles;  labor  in  manufacturing  was  paid  $28,609,  which  is  19.67 
per  cent,  of  the  value  of  the  manufactured  article.  The  value  of  the  raw 
material  above  stated  was  increased  142.64  per  cent,  by  manufacture — that 
is,  the  finished  product  was  worth  two  and  two-fifths  times  as  much  as  the  raw 
material.  Of  this  increase  labor  gets  33.25  per  cent.,  leaving  for  rents,  trans- 
portation, commission,  interest,  etc.,  66.75  per  cent.  Note  that  the  33.25  per 
cent,  bears  no  relation  to  the  142.64  per  cent.  Two  hundred  and  fifty-six 
millions  two  hundred  and  eighty-two  thousand  dollars  represents  the  capital 

63 


invested,  50,551  men  being  employed,  all  told,  in  the  implement  industry.  This 
averages  1.97  men  for  each  $10,000  capital,  and  $1,112  is  annually  paid  to  labor 
for  every  $10,000  invested.  The  consumer  who  spends  $100  for  implements 
receives  a  product  requiring  employment  of  10.39  men  for  one  day,  or  the  em- 
ployment of  one  man  10.39  days,  in  the  making.  Of  the  $100  $19.67  ultimately 
goes  to  labor,  $41.21  to  raw  material  and  the  remainder,  39.12,  is  divided  up 
among  rent,  transportation,  profit,  interest,  breakage  and  other  costs.  The 
same  amount  spent  for  liquor  would  have  employed  3.19  men  for  one  day,  or 
7.2  less  men  than  if  spent  for  implements;  of  the  $100  spent  for  liquor  labor 
would  receive  only  $7.63,  a  loss  of  $12.64,  and  the  producer  would  lose  $17.72. 

Thus,  $2,360,000,000  annually  spent  for  liquor,  if  put  into  the  average  of  all 
American  industries,  would  employ  all  now  engaged  in  liquor  making,  and  about 
487,125  more;  it  would  return  to  labor  over  $210,000,000  more,  and  to  the  pro- 
ducer of  the  raw  material  almost  a  billion  dollars  more.  This  does  not  consider 
the  enormous  saving  of  court,  asylum,  hospital,  poorhouse  and  like  costs  that 
would  be  very  greatly  reduced,  which  are  in  the  end  borne  by  the  People. 
We  come  to  the  business  world  with  the  proposition  that  prohibition  will  put 
the  four  hundred  million  dollars  now  spent  for  liquor  in  Chicago  into  the  useful 
industries  of  this  city,  creating  a  demand  for  goods  and  labor  never  known 
heretofore.  But  the  money  is  spent  now,  what  difference  will  it  make  if  it  is 
expended  in  some  other  way. 

The  answer  is,  the  money  spent  for  liquor  returns  less  to  the  purchaser 
for  value  received,  and  less  to  labor  than  money  spent  in  any  other  way. 
According  to  the  last  United  States  Census  official  figures  we  learn  that  the 
eight  leading  industries,  cotton  goods,  furniture,  knit  goods,  lumber  and 
building  material,  vehicles,  boots  and  shoes,  agricultural  implements,  and 
printing,  return  to  labor  an  average  of  twenty-four  and  one-half  cents  for  every 
dollar's  worth  of  product  turned  out,  while  the  liquor  industry  returns  only 
seven  and  two-thirds  cents  on  the  dollar  to  labor.  The  value,  at  the  factory, 
of  the  cotton  goods  and  the  liquors  produced  in  this  country  are  approximately 
equal,  yet  the  cotton  goods  industries  employed  379,000  men  while  the  liquor 
industries  employed  only  63,700,  or  more  than  six  times  as  many.  The  invest- 
ment of  less  than  twenty-two  hundred  dollars  will  employ  one  man  in  the 
cotton  goods  industry  while  it  requires  an  investment  of  more  than  twelve 
thousand  dollars  to  give  employment  to  one  man  in  the  liquor  industry. 

This  census  report  shows  that  labor  gets  sixteen  and  one-half  cents  of 
every  dollar's  worth  of  the  product  of  the  average  of  all  of  the  industries  in 
the  United  States  including  liquor,  whereas  he  gets  only  seven  and  two-thirds 
cents  out  of  every  dollar's  worth  of  liquor.  This  same  report  shows  that  the 
average  industry  employs  three  and  six-tenths  men  for  each  $10,000  invested, 
whereas  liquor  employs  only  eight-tenths  of  a  man  per  $10,000  investment. 
Hence,  if  the  money  invested  in  the  liquor  business  in  Chicago  were  re- 
invested in  the  cotton  goods,  furniture,  knit  goods,  lumber  and  building 
material,  vehicles,  boots  and  shoes,  agricultural  implements  and  printing  in- 
dustries, it  would  employ  six  times  as  many  men  as  it  now  employs;  if  the 
figures  is  now  36,000  men,  under  the  new  regime  it  would  give  employment  to 
216,000,  at  better  wages.  If  the  money  now  invested  in  liquor  were  reinvested 
in  the  average  of  all  the  industries  in  the  United  States  it  would  in  its  new 
capacity  give  employment  not  only  to  the  36,000  now  said  to  be  employed  by 
the  liquor  traffic  in  this  city,  but  to  more  than  120,000  others.  All  this  calcula- 
tion is  on  the  wholesale  basis;  on  a  retail  basis  the  figures  would  be  more  than 
tripled. 

If  we  had  the  money  that  is  now  invested  in  the  liquor  business  just 
spread  out  in  all  these  other  businesses  there  would  not  be  any  unemployment 
problem.  If  it  was  spread  out  it  would  not  only  employ  all  the  men  now  in 
the  liquor  business  but  it  would  employ  an  average  of  five  or  six  times  as  many 
men.  That  is  the  argument  we  want  to  make. 

Mr.    Geo.    H.    Wischman. 

\Vhat,  really,  is  a  saloon?  A  saloon  is  nothing  more  or  less,  gentlemen,  than 
a  small  workingmen's  social  club,  established  in  our  little  communities  in 
which  we  reside;  and  there  are  a  great  many  of  those  little  communities  in 
the  entire  City  of  Chicago.  A  saloon  is  not  a  money  making  proposition;  no 

64 


honorable  saloonkeeper  in  the  City  of  Chicago  looks  upon  it  as  such.  He  looks 
upon  it  as  a  social  club,  and  the  only  reason  that  it  is  tolerated  is  because  we 
are  too  poor  and  uneducated  to  join  the  Chicago  Athletic  Club,  the  Iroquois 
Club,  the  Hamilton  Club,  or  any  other  club.  That  is  the  only  reason  we  tolerate 
it.  It  has  a  great  place  in  our  community  when  it  is  properly  conducted.  Let 
us  see  just  what  benefit  it  really  is  to  the  community.  A  little  saloon  is  estab- 
lished, or  maybe  one,  two,  or  three,  in  the  little  community  in  which  we  reside. 
The  people  who  come  into  that  saloon  are  the  industrial  workers,  the  small 
tradesman,  and  every  common,  ordinary  man  who  lives  in  that  community.  A 
man  goes  in  there  for  what  purpose?  Not  to  spend  his  money,  not  to  get  drunk, 
not  to  consume  all  that  the  saloonkeeper  has  in  stock.  On  the  contrary,  he 
goes  in  there  for  the  purpose  of  sociability,  mostly.  He  goes  in  there  to  talk 
over  his  troubles,  the  problem  of  the  day,  his  family,  his  little  business,  and  his 
little  politics;  and  he  sits  down,  and,  perhaps,  plays  a  game  of  cards.  He 
drinks  a  social  glass  of  beer  with  his  friends,  or  a  glass  of  wine,  or  whatever 
he  desires.  The  man  who  is  engaged  in  that  business  does  not  want  him  to  do 
anything  else.  He  simply  wants  him  to  be  a  respectable  man,  and  he  is  a  re- 
spectable man.  Then  what  harm  could  such  a  place  be  in  this  community? 
None  at  all. 


BARNARD  £  MILLER 


LIBRARY 
PUBLIC  AFFAIRS  SFRVIC 

SEP  091980 


UNIVERSITY  OF 

LOS  ANGELES 


